Shillcox v. Saul
ORDER signed by Chief Judge Pamela Pepper on 10/4/2021 GRANTING 31 plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney fees under 42 USC §406(b). Defendant to pay $8,855.75 in attorney fees to Atty. Donald Chewning from funds withheld by defendant from plaintiff's past due benefits; upon receipt of fees, Atty. Chewning to refund to plaintiff $3,873 fee previously awarded under the EAJA. (cc: all counsel)(cb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
KRISTIE L. SHILLCOX,
Case No. 19-cv-1708-pp
ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES UNDER
42 U.S.C. §406(B) (DKT. NO. 31)
On July 27, 2020, the court granted the parties’ stipulated motion for
remand, reversed the Commissioner’s denial of benefits and remanded the case
to the Commissioner for further proceedings under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C.
§405(g). Dkt. No. 23. Three months later, the parties filed a stipulated motion
for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act in the amount of
$3,873, dkt. no. 29, which the court approved on October 27, 2020, dkt. no.
30. The plaintiff recently filed an unopposed motion for attorney fees under 42
U.S.C. §406(b), asking that a total fee of $8,855.75 be paid to Attorney Donald
J. Chewing with the previous EAJA award refunded to the plaintiff. Id. at 2.
The court will grant the unopposed motion and award the additional fees.
An attorney who succeeds in obtaining benefits for a social security
claimant may recover fees under 42 U.S.C. §406. “‘Section 406(a) governs fees
for representation in administrative proceedings before the Social Security
Administration; § 406(b) controls fees for representation in federal court.’”
Kopulos v. Barnhart, 318 F. Supp. 2d 657, 660 (N.D. Ill. 2004) (citing
Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 794 (2002)). The statute provides for a
reasonable fee not to exceed 25% of the past-due benefits awarded to the
claimant. Id. at 661. Such fees are deducted from the claimant's benefits and
do not constitute an award against the government. Id.
A motion for fees under §406(b) requires court approval. Congress did
not intend such review to override the claimant and counsel's fee arrangement
but rather to act as an “independent check” to ensure the arrangement yielded
a reasonable result. Gisbrecht, 535 U.S. at 807. Within the 25% boundary, the
attorney for the successful claimant must show that the fee sought is
reasonable for the services rendered. Id. In making its determination, the court
may consider the character of the representation and the results obtained,
reducing the award if the attorney is responsible for delay in the proceedings
that had the effect of inflating past-due benefits, or if the fee is so large in
comparison to the amount of time the counsel spent on the case that the fee
would constitute a windfall for the attorney. Id. at 808.
The plaintiff signed a contract with her attorney on November 21, 2019,
agreeing to a 25% total fee for representation before the agency and the court.
Dkt. No. 31-3. The second sentence of the fee contract stated:
I agree that my attorney shall charge and receive as the fee an
amount equal to twenty-five percent (25%) of the past-due benefits
that are awarded to my family and me in the event my case is won.
Id. at 1.
Because the award is paid out of past due benefits rather than agency
funds, the government will not stipulate to the fees. However, the plaintiff
represents that the government does not oppose the motion. Dkt. No. 31 at 4.
The record establishes that the plaintiff prevailed, the requested fee is
reasonable for the services rendered, the plaintiff agreed to pay 25% of
whatever past-due benefits were awarded to her, and Attorney Chewing says
that he will account for the EAJA offset by refunding $3,873 to the plaintiff
from the amount awarded in this order. Id. For these reasons, the court will
grant the motion for §406(b) attorney's fees.
The court GRANTS the plaintiff’s unopposed motion for attorney’s fees
under 42 U.S.C. §406(b). The defendant shall pay $8,855.75 in attorney fees to
Attorney Donald J. Chewning from the funds withheld by the Social Security
Administration from plaintiff’s past due benefits. Upon receipt of the fees,
Attorney Chewning shall refund to the plaintiff the $3,873.00 fee previously
awarded to him under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Dated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 4th day of October, 2021.
BY THE COURT:
HON. PAMELA PEPPER
Chief United States District Judge
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?