Costa v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 17946
| 9th Cir. | 2012Background
- Costa applied for SSA disability benefits; SSA denied; ALJ not disabled; magistrate remanded for further proceedings; Costa sought EAJA fees; magistrate reduced hours from 25 to 12 and overall to 41.1; SSA requester sought $10,544.72; district court reversed and reduced fees; Ninth Circuit reversed and awarded full requested fees of $10,544.72.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May district court cap EAJA hours in routine SSA cases? | Costa argues no de facto cap. | Commissioner endorses cap based on ‘routine’ cases. | No de facto cap; individualized hour review required. |
| Were reductions of hours for opening and subsequent memos justified? | Costa argues reductions were excessive. | District court's cuts were reasonable. | Not sufficiently explained; reductions were an abuse of discretion. |
| Does Moreno require explicit justification for large hour reductions? | Costa seeks honoring professional judgment. | Court may reduce hours with limited explanation. | Moreno requires specific reasons for large reductions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (lodestar method; exclude excessive or duplicative hours)
- Moreno v. City of Sacramento, 534 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2008) (deference to winning counsel; up to 10% reduction; explain cuts)
- Harden v. Commissioner of SSA, 497 F. Supp. 2d 1214 (D. Or. 2007) (20–40 hours typical; caution against rigid caps)