Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 27, 2024

McEneany v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:21-cv-10370
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In McEneany v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Schofield awarded counsel $35,400 in fees and ordered a $4,091.68 refund.

Who this affects

Conor McEneany’s counsel received a $35,400 fee award and was required to refund McEneany $4,091.68. Counsel had also represented that the previously paid $6,000 retainer had been refunded to McEneany. The Commissioner’s request for clarification was rendered moot.

What happened

In McEneany v. Commissioner of Social Security, the plaintiff’s lawyer asked for payment for work that helped secure Supplemental Security Income benefits. A magistrate judge recommended awarding $35,400 in fees and requiring the lawyer to refund $4,091.68 in fees previously paid under a federal fee-shifting law.

The Commissioner did not challenge the recommended fee award but asked how a $6,000 retainer already paid by the plaintiff should be counted. The lawyer said he had refunded that retainer to the plaintiff, making the Commissioner’s request for clarification moot.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield adopted the magistrate judge’s report in full. She awarded counsel $35,400 and ordered counsel to refund $4,091.68 to the plaintiff within five business days after receiving the fee award, then file a declaration confirming the refund.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
McEneany v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:21-cv-10370
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Feb. 27, 2024

Background

Counsel for Conor McEneany sought attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) for work performed in securing Supplemental Security Income benefits for McEneany. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave.

On November 17, 2023, Judge Cave issued a Report and Recommendation. It recommended that the attorney-fee motion be granted in part and denied in part, that counsel receive $35,400 in fees under § 406(b), and that counsel refund $4,091.68 in fees previously awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a federal law that can authorize fee awards against the government.

Responses and moot request

The deadline for objections was extended to December 8, 2023. The Commissioner timely responded but did not object to the recommendation that counsel receive § 406(b) fees. Instead, the Commissioner asked for clarification about whether the $6,000 non-refundable retainer that McEneany had already paid for federal-court representation was included in the § 406(b) award or was additional to it.

Counsel responded that the $6,000 retainer had been refunded to McEneany after the Commissioner raised the issue. The court found that this refund made the Commissioner’s request for clarification moot.

Court’s ruling

Because no timely objection was made to Judge Cave’s recommendations, the court reviewed the record for clear error. Judge Schofield found no clear error and adopted the Report and Recommendation in full.

The court awarded McEneany’s counsel $35,400 in attorney’s fees under § 406(b), reflecting an approximate effective hourly rate of $1,500. The court also ordered counsel to refund $4,091.68 to McEneany within five business days of receiving the fee award and to file a docket declaration confirming the refund. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motions at Docket Entries 19 and 20.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.