Williams v. Social Security Administration
Filing
29
OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Frank H. Seay granting 26 Motion for Attorney Fees(dma, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
DOUGLAS EDWARD WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN1, Commissioner
Social Security Administration
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. CIV-10-490-FHS-SPS
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff’s counsel filed a Motion For Attorney Fees Pursuant
to
42
U.S.C.
§
406(b)
(Dkt.
No.
26)
on
October
22,
2013.
Judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff on March 28, 2012,
remanding this action to the Commissioner under sentence four of
42
U.S.C.
§
405(g).
On
remand,
the
Commissioner
issued
an
October 13, 2013, decision finding in favor of Plaintiff and
determining that Plaintiff was entitled to disability benefits
beginning on June, 2006 through September 2013. On this same
date, Plaintiff’s counsel was notified by the Social Security
Administration that $15,058.50 had been withheld by the agency
for the payment of attorney’s fees. $3,987.70 had been previously
1
The Court has been informed by Defendant that on February
14, 2013, Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of
Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25 (d) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, Carolyn W. Colvin is automatically substituted
for Michael J. Asture as the defendant in this action. Thus,
this suit will proceed with this substitution in effect. See 42
U.S.C. Sec. 405 (g) (“Any action instituted in accordance with
this subsection shall survive notwithstanding any change in the
person occupying the office of Commissioner of Social Security or
any vacancy in such office.”)
1
paid
for
represents
42
U.S.C.
25%
of
§
a
406(a)
fees.
$60,234.00
The
$15,058.50
past-due
benefits
amount
award
to
Plaintiff.
Attorney fees are awardable under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) when
a
social
security
claimant
is
awarded
disability
following a remand from a federal district court.
benefits
McGraw v.
Barnhart, 450 F.3d 493, 496 (10th Cir. 2006). Plaintiff has 14
days
from
the
54(d)(2)(B)(i).
judgment
to
file
the
motion.
Fed.R.Civ.P.
Plaintiff’s Motion is timely filed. Defendant
declines to assert a position as to the reasonableness of the
fees since it is not the real party interest.
Plaintiff’s counsel has moved the Court to approve an
attorney fee award under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) in the amount of
$14,000.00 for counsel’s representation of Plaintiff before the
Court.
Counsel’s requested fees do not exceed either the amount
contracted for in the parties’ contingency agreement or the 25%
limitation of section 406(b).
Neither the Commissioner nor the
Plaintiff have presented any objection to Plaintiff’s counsel’s
request for fees in the amount of $14,000.00.
The Commissioner
has filed an informative response on the various points of law to
be considered, but does not challenge the reasonableness of the
requested fee. The Court has conducted an independent review of
the
record,
including
the
contingency-fee
contract
between
counsel and Plaintiff, and counsel’s documented time records, and
concludes
counsel’s
motion
is
timely
and
that
the
requested
attorney fee amount of $14,000.00 is reasonable under the facts
and circumstances of this case given the nature and quality of
the representation and the results achieved.
2
See Gisbrecht v.
Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 807-809 (2002); see also Wren v. Astrue,
525 F.3d 931, 937 (10th Cir. 2008)(“the 25% limitation of fees
for court representation found in § 406(b) is not itself limited
by the amount of fees awarded by the Commissioner”).
Consequently, Plaintiff’s counsel’s Motion For Attorney Fees
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) (Dkt. No. 26) is granted in the
amount of $14,000.00.
Pursuant to Weakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d
575, 580 (10th Cir. 1986), Plaintiff's counsel is directed to
refund
to
Plaintiff
previously
awarded
the
under
smaller
the
(“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
amount, without any
amount
Equal
of
Access
fees
to
($3,987.70)
Justice
Act
This refund is for the full EAJA
withholding, offset, or deduction.
It is so ordered this 13th day of November, 2013.
3
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?