Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Substantive rulingFiled Aug. 4, 2025

Lenz v. Kijakazi

Judge
Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz
Docket
0:23-cv-00779
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
3
Social SecurityFee Petition
In one sentence

In Lenz v. Kijakazi, Chief Judge Patrick J. Schiltz granted plaintiff's attorney's request for $9,751.50 in net legal fees — drawn from the plaintiff's Social Security back pay — after finding the fee reasonable under federal law.

Who this affects

Social Security disability claimants and their attorneys in the District of Minnesota, particularly regarding how courts evaluate the reasonableness of attorney fee requests paid from past-due Social Security benefits under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).

What happened

In Lenz v. Kijakazi (Case No. 23-CV-0779), a Social Security disability claimant named William L. sued the Commissioner of Social Security. After the federal court sent the case back to the Social Security Administration for further review, an administrative law judge ruled in William L.'s favor, entitling him to past-due benefits.

William L.'s attorney then asked the court to approve a fee of $9,751.50 (net) under a federal law — 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) — that allows Social Security claimants' lawyers to be paid a reasonable fee, capped at 25 percent of the claimant's past-due benefits, directly from those benefits. The total fee agreed upon between William L. and his attorney was $18,251.50, but because the attorney had already received $8,500.00 through a separate federal fee program called the Equal Access to Justice Act, only the $9,751.50 difference remained to be paid. The government did not oppose the request.

Chief Judge Patrick J. Schiltz granted the motion, finding the fee reasonable. The court noted that counsel spent 52.3 hours on the case, producing an effective hourly rate of about $350 — lower than rates other judges in the same district have approved — and that the total fee did not exceed 25 percent of William L.'s past-due benefits.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case

Lenz v. Kijakazi (William L. v. Commissioner of Social Security), Case No. 23-CV-0779 (PJS/DTS), United States District Court, District of Minnesota.

Judge

Chief Judge Patrick J. Schiltz.

Background

Plaintiff William L. brought suit against the Commissioner of Social Security. The district court previously remanded (sent back) the case to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. On remand, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) — an agency official who conducts hearings — issued a decision favorable to William L., resulting in an award of past-due benefits.

Motion at Issue

William L.'s attorney filed a motion for approval of attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), which governs attorney fee awards in Social Security cases paid out of a claimant's past-due benefits. The statute caps such fees at 25 percent of the total past-due benefits. The fee agreement between William L. and counsel set the total fee at $18,251.50. Because counsel had previously received $8,500.00 under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) — a separate federal statute that allows fee recovery from the government in certain cases — the net amount sought under § 406(b) was $9,751.50. The government took no position on the request.

Legal Standard

Under § 406(b) and the Supreme Court's decision in Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002), the fee agreement between the claimant and counsel is the primary basis for determining fees, but courts must independently assess reasonableness. Relevant factors include the quality of representation, results achieved, hours spent, and the resulting effective hourly rate.

Court's Analysis: Chief Judge Schiltz found the requested fee reasonable based on the following:

  1. Counsel achieved a favorable outcome for William L. before the ALJ on remand.
  2. Counsel spent 52.3 hours on the matter, yielding an effective hourly rate of approximately $350 — below rates other judges in the District of Minnesota have approved (e.g., $578.48/hour in Fensterman v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., and $633.39/hour in Lee R. v. Kijakazi).
  3. The total fee of $18,251.50 did not exceed 25 percent of William L.'s past-due benefits, as required by statute.

Ruling

The motion was granted. The court awarded plaintiff's counsel a net fee of $9,751.50 under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), payable from William L.'s past-due Social Security benefits. This represents the total agreed fee of $18,251.50 minus the $8,500.00 previously received under the EAJA.

Reviewer note from the AI+
The opinion uses the anonymized name 'William L.' for the plaintiff, but the case caption lists 'Lenz v. Kijakazi,' suggesting the plaintiff's last name is Lenz. The summary uses 'William L.' as that is how the court refers to the plaintiff within the opinion text. The case name in the caption is used for the case name field. Note also that 'Kijakazi' appears in the case name even though the defendant is described as 'Commissioner of Social Security' in the body — this is standard practice when the named commissioner changes during litigation.
The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.