Forquignon v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
25
ORDER granting 24 the unopposed motion of Plaintiff's counsel, Richard A. Culbertson, for authorization to charge a reasonable fee pursuant to 42 USC 406(b). Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 3/4/2021. (AR)
Case 5:17-cv-00323-PRL Document 25 Filed 03/04/21 Page 1 of 4 PageID 837
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION
STANLEY JAMES
FORQUIGNON,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No: 5:17-cv-323-PRL
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the unopposed motion of Plaintiff’s counsel,
Richard A. Culbertson, for authorization to charge a reasonable fee pursuant to 42
U.S.C. §406(b) in the amount of $7,916.25. In support of the motion, Mr. Culbertson
has filed a signed fee agreement in which Plaintiff acknowledges a 25% fee award of
past due benefits. (Doc. 24-1). Mr. Culbertson represents that the Commissioner has
no objection to the requested fees.
I.
Background
On September 6, 2018, this Court reversed and remanded the case to the Social
Security Administration for further proceedings. (Doc. 20). On November 19, 2018,
the Court entered an order awarding attorney’s fees to Mr. Culbertson under the Equal
Access to Justice Act (EAJA) in the sum of $3,758.49, for time spent representing
Plaintiff before this Court. (Docs. 23). Subsequently, on remand, Plaintiff was awarded
Case 5:17-cv-00323-PRL Document 25 Filed 03/04/21 Page 2 of 4 PageID 838
past due benefits in the amount of $55,665.00. (Doc. 24-2). Pursuant to the fee
agreement, the attorney fee payable from Plaintiff’s past-due benefits is $10,157.76.
This is twenty five percent of the past due benefits—$13,916.25–minus the previously
awarded EAJA fees in the amount of $3,758.49. Petitioner has voluntarily reduced the
amount he is requesting to the amount which is left from the twenty-five percent of
benefits withheld by the Commissioner after payment of the fee due to the
administrative attorney. (Doc. 24-2).
II.
Discussion
An attorney, as here, who successfully represents a Social Security claimant in
court may be awarded as part of the judgment Aa reasonable fee ... not in excess of 25
percent of the ... past-due benefits awarded to the claimant. 42 U.S.C. §406(b)(1)(A).
The fee is payable Aout of, and not in addition to, the amount of [the] past-due benefits.
Id. As required by Gisbrecht v. Barnhardt, 535 U.S. 789, 808 (2002), courts should
approach contingent-fee determinations by first looking to the agreement between the
attorney and the client, and then testing that agreement for reasonableness. When
called upon to assess the reasonableness of the award, a court should balance the
interest in protecting claimants from inordinately large fees against the interest in
ensuring that attorneys are adequately compensate so that they continue to represent
clients in disability benefits cases. Gisbrecht, 535 U.S. at 805. In making this
reasonableness determination, the Gisbrecht court highlighted several important factors
including: (1) whether the requested fee is out of line with the character of the
-2-
Case 5:17-cv-00323-PRL Document 25 Filed 03/04/21 Page 3 of 4 PageID 839
representation and the results the representation achieved; (2) whether the attorney
unreasonably delayed the proceedings in an attempt to increase the accumulation of
benefits and thereby increase his own fee; and (3) whether Athe benefits awarded are
large in comparison to the amount of time counsel spent on the case, the so-called
windfall factor. Id. at 808. In these instances, a downward reduction may be in order.
Here, the Court finds that the requested attorney’s fees are reasonable. The
requested fee will not result in a windfall for counsel –i.e., that counsel is receiving
compensation he is not entitled to and that payment of the compensation would be
unfair or detrimental to Plaintiff. In this regard, Mr. Culbertson has submitted a signed
fee agreement in which Plaintiff acknowledged that counsel would receive 25% of all
past due benefits awarded on appeal. (Doc. 24-1). Moreover, Mr. Culbertson
submitted records showing that he and his associate spent at least 19.1 hours on this
case before it was remanded, and it does not include time billable under the EAJA or
spent representing Mr. Forquignon at the administrative level. (Docs. 22, 24).
Accordingly, for these reasons, and in the absence of any objection by the
Commissioner, Mr. Culbertson’s motion for authorization to charge a reasonable fee
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 406(b) (Doc. 32) is due to be GRANTED. Section 406(b) fees
are approved for Mr. Culbertson in the sum of $7,916.25.
-3-
Case 5:17-cv-00323-PRL Document 25 Filed 03/04/21 Page 4 of 4 PageID 840
DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on March 4, 2021.
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Parties
-4-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?