Vasquez v. Commissioner of Social Security

Background

Hilda Altagracia Vasquez sought judicial review of the Social Security Administration’s denial of her application for disability insurance benefits. An administrative law judge found that she was not disabled, and the agency’s Appeals Council denied review. In the earlier stage of this case, Vasquez moved for judgment on the pleadings, meaning a decision based on the parties’ written filings. Judge Moses granted that motion and remanded the case to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Judgment was entered the next day.

Vasquez then moved for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a federal law that generally allows a prevailing party in litigation against the United States to recover reasonable fees unless the government’s position was substantially justified or special circumstances make an award unjust. The Commissioner did not argue that the government’s position was substantially justified or that special circumstances made an award unjust. Instead, the Commissioner agreed that fees should be awarded but argued that eight of the 61.4 requested attorney hours should be excluded.

Parties’ arguments

The Commissioner argued that the case did not involve unusually complex factual or legal issues, that Vasquez’s lawyer’s experience should have made the work more efficient, and that the 409-page administrative record was relatively short. Vasquez responded that counsel had to raise seven separate issues, some without clear controlling appellate authority, and had not represented her during the administrative proceedings. She also argued that the record included handwritten treatment notes requiring careful review and that oral argument added to the reasonable time spent.

Vasquez initially sought $13,629.40 for 61.4 hours of attorney time at $221 per hour and 0.6 hours of paralegal time at $100 per hour. In reply, she requested fees for an additional 1.6 hours spent responding to the Commissioner’s opposition. The Commissioner did not contest the $221 hourly rate.

Analysis

Judge Moses concluded that the case was more complex than many Social Security cases. Counsel challenged the administrative law judge’s decision on seven grounds, none of which was frivolous, and Judge Moses had relied on several of those grounds when ordering the remand. She also found that counsel’s experience was not a proper reason to reduce the compensable hours, particularly because counsel had not represented Vasquez before the agency and therefore had to review the administrative record and hearing materials for the first time in federal court.

The court further found that the record’s length alone did not determine the reasonable number of hours. The record contained handwritten treatment notes that required careful deciphering, and counsel had to prepare for and present oral argument. Judge Moses therefore approved the requested hours for reviewing the record and preparing the factual and legal portions of the briefs.

The court also approved the additional 1.6 hours spent preparing the reply on the fee motion. It explained that the Equal Access to Justice Act covers the fee-award phase of successful litigation and found the time spent on the reply reasonable.

Disposition

The court’s order states that Vasquez’s motion for attorney fees was GRANTED. Vasquez was awarded $13,983, to be paid directly to her counsel pursuant to their assignment.