2:23-cv-00704•Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Full text
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Mary Ruth Jones, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant. No. CV-23-00704-PHX-KML ORDER On September 16, 2024, the court remanded this case to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. (Doc. 21.) Shortly after that order, the court approved a stipulation between the parties that awarded plaintiff’s counsel $8,400 in attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. (Doc. 24.) On remand, plaintiff obtained a fully favorable decision. (Doc. 26-1 at 3.) Plaintiff’s counsel now seeks an award of $9,753.75 in attorneys’ fees for representing plaintiff on a contingency basis. That amount is 25% of the past-due benefits. (Doc. 26-1 at 4.) According to counsel’s billing records, she performed 35.5 hours of work, meaning the award sought represents an hourly fee of $274.75. (Doc. 26-3 at 2-3.) The relevant statute allows the court to award counsel “a reasonable fee for [her] representation, not in excess of 25 percent of the total of the past-due benefits.” 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). When an attorney files a request for fees under § 406(b), the court must “look[] first to the contingent-fee agreement, then test[] it for reasonableness.” Crawford v. Astrue, 586 F.3d 1142, 1149 (9th Cir. 2009) (simplified). There is no “definitive list of factors that Case 2:23-cv-00704-KML Document 28 Filed 04/30/26 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 should be considered in determining whether a fee is reasonable or how those factors should be weighed.” Id. at 1151. But the court’s reasonableness inquiry may look to “substandard performance, delay, or benefits that are not in proportion to the time spent on the case.” Id. Here, the agreement allows counsel to recover 25% of past-due benefits. (Doc. 26- 2 at 2.) There is “no evidence of fraud or overreaching in the making of the 25% contingent- fee agreement[],” so the 25% permitted by the agreement is an appropriate starting point. Id. The only remaining issue is whether the amount the agreement contemplates is reasonable. There is no evidence of poor performance or delay by counsel. And counsel’s effective hourly rate of $274.75 is reasonable based on the work performed and the risk that no benefits would be awarded. IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) (Doc. 25) is GRANTED in the amount of $9,753.75. The fees are payable to plaintiff’s counsel, Robin Larkin, Larkin & Fern, PLLC, and can be made by electronic fund transfer or by check. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiff’s counsel shall, after receipt of the above- awarded fee, refund to plaintiff all fees awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act. Dated this 30th day of April, 2026. Case 2:23-cv-00704-KML Document 28 Filed 04/30/26 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.