Guilfoyle v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
Filing
36
ORDER granting 32 Motion for Attorney Fees per Rule 406b in the amount of $10,267.75. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 1/2/2019.(gnan )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ORANGEBURG DIVISION
Sonia Guilfoyle,
Plaintiff,
v.
Commissioner of Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
C/A No. 5:14-4454-TMC
ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to the Social
Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). (ECF No. 32). Plaintiff seeks an award of attorney’s fees in the
amount of $10,267.75. (ECF No. 32 at 2). The Commissioner has filed a response informing the
court that she does not object to Plaintiff’s motion for fees. (ECF No. 34). As discussed below,
based on the documents provided to the court, the court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to $10,267.75.
Pursuant to Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 808 (2002), in reviewing a request for
attorney’s fees under § 406(b), a court must look first to the contingent fee agreement and assess its
reasonableness. A reduction in the contingent fee may be appropriate when (1) the fee is out of line
with the character of the representation and the results achieved; (2) counsel's delay caused past-due
benefits to accumulate during the pendency of the case in court, or (3) past-due benefits are large in
comparison to the amount of time counsel spent on the case. Id.
Based upon a review of the petition and these factors, the court finds that an award of
$10,267.75 is reasonable. Pursuant to a contingency fee agreement, Plaintiff agreed to pay counsel
twenty-five percent (25%) of any past-due benefits. (ECF No. 32-3). Plaintiff was awarded back
benefits and 25% of the award was withheld, or $10,267.75. (ECF Nos. 32-2 at 2). In compliance
with 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1)(A), counsel’s requested fee does not exceed twenty-five percent (25%)
of these past-due benefits.
Furthermore, the requested attorney’s fee is reasonable given that
counsel expended 55.3 hours working on this matter at the court level. (ECF Nos. 32-1 at 2; 32-5).
Wrenn v. Astrue, 525 F.3d 931, 937 (10th Cir. 2008) (noting that under § 406(b) the court makes fee
awards only for work done before the court). Additionally, Plaintiff's counsel achieved a successful
result without any unreasonable delay. In light of counsel’s specialized skill in social security
disability cases, the attorney's fee award does not amount to a windfall. Cf. Brown v. Barnhart, 270
F.Supp.2d 769, 772–73 (W.D.Va. 2003).
Therefore, based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees (ECF No. 32) is
granted, and Plaintiff is awarded $10,267.75 in attorney’s fees.1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
January 2, 2019
Anderson, South Carolina
1
“Fee awards may be made under both [EAJA and § 406(b) ], but the claimant’s attorney
must refund to the claimant the amount of the smaller fee [,] . . . up to the point the claimant
receives 100 percent of the past-due benefits.” Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 796 (2002)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Here, Plaintiff was previously awarded
$8,650.00 in attorney’s fees under the EAJA. (ECF No. 31). However, this fee award was
reduced by $8,650.00 because of Plaintiff’s student loan debt (ECF No. 32-4), and counsel did
not receive any EAJA fees. (ECF No. 34 at 2). Accordingly, counsel is not required to refund the
previously awarded EAJA fees.
2
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?