Mirante v. Saul

Background

Thomas John Mirante applied for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits in 2016. The Social Security Administration denied the application, and an administrative law judge and the agency’s Appeals Council later found against him.

Mirante retained counsel to challenge that decision in federal court. The court adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation that the case be sent back to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. On remand, an administrative law judge found that Mirante was disabled and approved him for benefits. Mirante was awarded $129,725 in past-due benefits.

Mirante’s retainer agreement provided for a contingent fee of 25 percent of past-due benefits. The Social Security Administration withheld $32,431.25 for legal expenses: $7,200 for the lawyer who handled the administrative proceedings and $25,231.25 for counsel’s work in federal court. Counsel sought the $25,231.25 withheld for the federal-court representation under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Counsel had also received a $7,000 fee award under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a separate federal fee statute.

Filing Deadline

The government noted that the fee application may have been filed after the usual 14-day deadline. The court held that equitable tolling—extending a deadline because circumstances made timely filing unfair—was warranted. Counsel had filed the motion before receiving the Social Security Administration’s notice of award and had repeatedly contacted the agency’s payment center without receiving a response. The court therefore considered the fee motion.

Reasonableness of the Fee

Section 406(b) permits a court to approve a reasonable fee for successful representation in federal court, subject to a cap of 25 percent of the claimant’s past-due benefits. The court reviewed the contingent-fee agreement as an independent check against unreasonable results and considered the quality and outcome of the representation, any delay caused by counsel, fraud or overreaching, and whether the fee would be an improper windfall.

The court found the arrangement reasonable. The requested amount was below the 25-percent statutory cap. Counsel had helped obtain benefits after the administrative process had rejected Mirante’s claim, spent 35.2 hours reviewing the 423-page administrative record and litigating the case, and was not responsible for undue delay. The court found no evidence of fraud, overreaching, or client dissatisfaction. It also concluded that the fee would not be a windfall given the difficulty and uncertainty of obtaining benefits and counsel’s efficient work.

Disposition

The court granted Mirante’s motion for attorney’s fees. Under section 406(b), counsel was awarded the $25,231.25 withheld by the Social Security Administration from Mirante’s past-due benefits. Because counsel had also received the $7,000 Equal Access to Justice Act award for the same work, the court ordered counsel to refund $7,000 directly to Mirante. The clerk was directed to close the fee motion.