Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 3, 2024

Balz v. Saul

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:20-cv-07729
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Social SecurityFee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Balz v. Saul, Judge Karas granted counsel’s fee motion and ordered refund of $11,200 in earlier EAJA fees to Gregory Balz.

Who this affects

Gregory Balz and his counsel; the order granted counsel’s fee motion and required counsel to refund $11,200 to Balz.

What happened

In Balz v. Saul, Gregory Balz sought review of the Social Security Administration’s denial of disability benefits. The court previously reversed that decision and sent the case back for further proceedings, after which Balz was approved for benefits totaling $152,114 in past-due payments.

Balz’s lawyer then asked for the funds withheld from those benefits for attorney’s fees. A magistrate judge recommended granting the request and directing the lawyer to return $11,200 in fees previously awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The government did not object.

Judge Karas found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, granted the fee motion, directed Balz’s lawyer to refund $11,200 to Balz, and ordered the case closed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Balz v. Saul · No. 7:20-cv-07729
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Apr. 3, 2024

Background

Gregory Balz brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying his application for Social Security Disability benefits. The administrative law judge found that Balz was not disabled. After the parties filed competing motions for judgment on the pleadings, Judge Paul E. Davison adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation, reversed the administrative law judge’s decision, and sent the case back for further proceedings. The court also awarded $11,200 in attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a federal law allowing certain fee awards against the government.

On remand, the Commissioner approved Balz for benefits and reported that his past-due benefits totaled $152,114. The Commissioner withheld $38,028.50, or 25 percent of that amount, for attorney’s fees. Balz’s counsel filed a motion under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) seeking the withheld funds. Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik recommended granting the motion and directing counsel to refund the previously awarded $11,200 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees directly to Balz. The government filed no objections.

Court’s Ruling

Judge Kenneth M. Karas reviewed the recommendation for clear error because no objections were filed. Finding no substantive error, the court adopted the recommendation in its entirety and granted Balz’s motion. The court directed Balz’s counsel to refund the previously awarded $11,200 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees directly to Balz and directed the clerk to close the case.

Disposition

The fee motion was granted. The recommendation was adopted in full, the $11,200 refund was ordered, and the case was closed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.