Lewis v. Kijakazi
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:20-cv-01352
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 4
In Lewis v. Kijakazi (now captioned against Commissioner Frank Bisignano), Judge Katherine Menendez granted plaintiff's attorney Meredith E. Marcus a $21,636.26 fee award for successfully winning $86,545 in past-due Social Security disability benefits, while also ordering Marcus to refund the plaintiff the $8,800 in previously paid fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Social Security disability claimants and their attorneys who have obtained favorable decisions on remand and seek attorney fee awards under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1), particularly those who have also received prior fee awards under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) and must navigate the offset requirement.
What happened
In Lewis v. Kijakazi, a Social Security disability case in the District of Minnesota, a plaintiff identified as Gerald L. filed suit in June 2020 challenging the denial of his disability benefits. After the case was sent back to the Social Security Administration for further review, an Administrative Law Judge issued a favorable decision awarding Gerald L. $86,545 in past-due benefits. His attorney, Meredith E. Marcus, then asked the court to approve a fee of $21,636.25 — equal to 25% of the past-due benefits — under the federal law that governs attorney fees in Social Security cases (42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1)). The Commissioner of Social Security took no position on the amount but asked the court to independently verify that it was reasonable.
Federal law allows a court to award a winning Social Security claimant's attorney up to 25% of the claimant's past-due benefits, but only if the fee is reasonable. The court evaluated several factors: the contingency fee agreement Gerald L. signed (which specified 25% of any award), the 50.35 hours Ms. Marcus spent on the case (translating to an effective hourly rate of about $429.72), the absence of any delay or poor representation by counsel, and comparable fee rates approved by other courts in the same district. The court found that an effective rate of $429.72 per hour is below rates that other courts in this district have approved, and that the hours worked were not excessive given the complexity of the matter.
Judge Katherine Menendez granted the motion and ordered the Commissioner to pay $21,636.26 directly to Ms. Marcus. However, because Ms. Marcus had already received $8,800 in attorney fees under a separate federal law — the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which pays fees from government funds rather than the claimant's recovery — she is required to refund that $8,800 to Gerald L. This offset rule exists so that an attorney cannot keep two full fee awards for the same work; the smaller of the two awards must be returned to the client.
The detailed version
- Lewis v. Kijakazi (now Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security), No. 20-cv-1352 (KMM/TNL)
- Katherine Menendez, United States District Judge
Background
Plaintiff Gerald L. filed this Social Security disability benefits appeal on June 11, 2020. On September 26, 2022, the court remanded (sent back) the case to the Commissioner for further proceedings, adopting the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung (ret.). On December 6, 2022, the court approved a stipulated award of attorney fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, in the amount of $8,800. Following remand, a Social Security Administration Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a favorable decision awarding Gerald L. $86,545 in past-due disability benefits.
Motion at issue
On August 11, 2025, plaintiff's counsel Meredith E. Marcus filed a motion for attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1), seeking $21,636.25 — equal to 25% of the $86,545 past-due benefits awarded, and the statutory maximum. The Commissioner took no position on the motion but asked the court to independently assess reasonableness and to specify that any award come from withheld past-due benefits.
Legal standard
Under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), a court may award a 'reasonable fee' to a successful Social Security claimant's attorney for work performed before the court, capped at 25% of the claimant's past-due benefits. The Supreme Court's decision in Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002), requires counsel to demonstrate the fee is reasonable for services rendered, and the court has an independent obligation to so find. Factors bearing on reasonableness include: (1) the terms of the contingency fee agreement; (2) whether counsel caused delay or rendered substandard representation; and (3) whether the fee would be 'large in comparison to the amount of time counsel spent on the case.'
Analysis and ruling:
- Successful representation: The court found the 'judgment favorable to the claimant' requirement of § 406(b)(1)(A) satisfied because Gerald L. received $86,545 in past-due benefits.
- Reasonableness of fee: The court found the requested $21,636.25 fee reasonable for several reasons: (a) Gerald L. signed a contingency fee agreement specifying 25% of any past-due benefits, consistent with the statutory cap; (b) the Supreme Court has recognized 25% contingency agreements as the most common arrangement in Social Security cases; (c) there was no indication of delay or substandard representation by Ms. Marcus; (d) Ms. Marcus spent a combined 50.35 hours on the case, yielding an effective hourly rate of approximately $429.72 — below rates approved in comparable cases in this district (citing Smith v. Kijakazi, approving an effective rate of $900/hour); and (e) the hours spent were not excessive given the briefing and lengthy administrative record.
- Commissioner's request for qualification: The court declined to specify in its order that any shortfall in withheld funds must be recovered from Gerald L. rather than from government-held past-due benefits, because the Commissioner made no showing that the withheld funds were insufficient.
- EAJA offset: Under Gisbrecht, when an attorney collects fees under both EAJA and § 406(b) for the same work, the attorney must refund the smaller amount to the claimant. Because the EAJA award ($8,800) is smaller than the § 406(b) award ($21,636.25), Ms. Marcus must refund $8,800 to Gerald L. The court noted the distinction that § 406(b) fees come from the claimant's recovery, while EAJA fees are paid by the government as a penalty to the Commissioner.
Disposition
Motion GRANTED. The Commissioner is ordered to pay $21,636.26 directly to Ms. Marcus. Ms. Marcus is ordered to refund $8,800 (the prior EAJA fee award) to plaintiff Gerald L.
Note on caption
The case was originally filed against Kilolo Kijakazi as Commissioner; Frank Bisignano is the current Commissioner and is named in the order's caption.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.