Richardson, John v. Berryhill, Nancy
Filing
24
OPINION and ORDER granting 21 Motion for Attorney Fees. The court APPROVES a representative fee of $19,148.68. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 11/23/2020. (kwf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
JOHN RICHARDSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
OPINION and ORDER
ANDREW SAUL,
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration,
18-cv-188-jdp
Defendant.
Meredith Marcus, counsel for plaintiff, moves under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) for a fee award
of $ 23,100 after plaintiff was awarded $116,188.00 in past-due benefits. Dkt. 21. Counsel’s
requested fee represents approximately 20% of plaintiff’s past-due benefits, so it falls within
the amount allowed by statute and the parties’ fee agreement. See Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535
U.S. 789, 792 (2002); Dkt. 21-2.
The total amount of time that counsel’s firm spent on this case for proceedings in this
court was 23.1 hours, resulting in a proposed effective rate of $1,000 an hour. Of the 23.1
hours, 17.7 hours was attorney time and the remainder was for counsel’s legal assistants. Dkt
21-3 and Dkt. 21-4. Counsel acknowledges the high rate, but she says that it is justified by the
excellent results she obtained. Specifically, she says that plaintiff will potentially receive an
additional $335,800 in disability benefits over his lifetime. In Evans v. Berryhill, No. 12-cv-888jdp, 2018 WL 835172 (W.D. Wis. Feb. 13, 2018), this court approved an effective rate of
$1,000 under similar circumstances, so counsel’s motion is GRANTED. For simplicity, the
court will subtract counsel’s $3,951.32 fee under the Equal Access to Justice Act, which would
otherwise have to be refunded to plaintiff. The court APPROVES a representative fee of
$19,148.68
Entered November 23, 2020.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge
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?