Moses v. Berryhill
3:17-cv-00578
D. Conn.Jul 8, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Harriet R.M. challenged the Social Security Administration’s denial of her disability and income benefit claims.
- After an initial remand and judgment, the plaintiff was ultimately awarded past-due benefits.
- Plaintiff’s counsel, Charles E. Binder, previously received $5,750.00 in fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).
- Counsel moved for $62,275.00 in attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), representing 25% of past-due benefits awarded to the plaintiff and her child.
- The Commissioner took no position on the Section 406(b) fee application; the court was tasked with evaluating its timeliness and reasonableness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Section 406(b) fee motion was timely | Motion was filed within 14 days of notice | No objection | Motion was timely |
| Whether the requested fee exceeded the statutory cap | Fee was exactly 25% of awarded past-due benefits | No objection | Does not exceed statutory cap |
| Reasonableness of the requested fee (no windfall) | Counsel's efforts and results justified the fee | No objection | Fee reasonable, not a windfall |
| Whether the EAJA fee must be refunded | Counsel will refund the EAJA award as required | No objection | Counsel must refund EAJA award |
Key Cases Cited
- Wells v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 367 (2d Cir. 1990) (establishes standards for reasonableness and windfall analysis under § 406(b))
- Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002) (clarifies test for assessing reasonableness of contingency fee agreements in Social Security cases)