Lewis v. Kijakazi, 3:22-cv-05180

Crystal Lewis sought judicial review after the Social Security Administration denied her benefits.
The court previously granted summary judgment in Lewis's favor, remanding her case for further proceedings and awarding her $8,300 in attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).
On remand, the Commissioner awarded Lewis $161,184 in past-due benefits.
Lewis had a contingent-fee agreement with her attorney, Richard Zieman, allowing up to 25% of past-due benefits as fees.
Zieman filed a motion requesting $40,296 in attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), consistent with the agreement.
The court reviewed the motion for reasonableness and compliance with applicable law.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the requested § 406(b) fee is reasonable	Lewis (through counsel) argues the fee is reasonable under the contingent-fee agreement and established practice, supported by timesheets and prior case law.	Commissioner’s position not directly disputed; the main concern is the fee request’s reasonableness under statutory and case law limits.	The court held the requested $40,296 fee (25%) is reasonable and within the statutory cap.
Whether EAJA attorney’s fees must be refunded when a § 406(b) award is made	Lewis’s position: Attorney will refund the EAJA award to comply with the law.	Commissioner relies on statutory requirement to avoid double-payment to counsel.	The court ordered Zieman to refund the $8,300 EAJA award to Lewis.

Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002) (explains how § 406(b) controls but does not displace contingent-fee agreements and requires reasonableness review by the courts)
Russell v. Sullivan, 930 F.2d 1443 (9th Cir. 1991) (discusses relationship between EAJA and Social Security Act fees)
Crawford v. Astrue, 586 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2009) (sets out the standard for assessing the reasonableness of § 406(b) fees)
Moreno v. City of Sacramento, 534 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2008) (courts should generally defer to the professional judgment of successful contingent-fee lawyers)
Costa v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 690 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 2012) (reiterates deference to the judgment of successful Social Security disability counsel)