Smith v. Saul

District Court, E.D. North Carolina

Smith v. Saul

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION NO: 7:18-CV-00214-BO

TERR] ANTOINETTE SMITH, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER APPROVING 406(b) FEES v. ) ) ANDREW SAUL ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. )

Plaintiff's counsel filed a motion for approval of attorney’s fees under section 206(b) of the Social Security Act,

42 U.S.C. § 406

(b), seeking an attorney’s fee $22,059.88 from past due benefits of $88,236 payable to Plaintiff. Attorney’s fees under section 206(b) are paid from past-duc benefits awarded to a successful claimant,

42 U.S.C. §406

(b). Counsel agrees that this requested fee will pay for all services at all levels. Plaintiff's counsel’s request therefore represents approval of attorney fees of 25% of total retroactive benefits. Under Gisbrecht v. Barnhart,

535 U.S. 789

,

122 S. Ct. 1817

(2002), it is the duty of the Court to determine a reasonable fee. The Court, in Culbertson v. Berryiil!,

586 U.S. 304

,

139 S. Ct. 517

(2019), has endorsed the use of acontingency contract between the parties to allow up to a 25% fee of aggregate benefits for representation in Federal Court, providing that such a fee is reasonable. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s counsel be allowed fees under

42 U.S.C. § 406

(b) in the amount of _/ 4 we? 00

— This thep of Yu , 2021.

TERRENCE W. BOYLE j UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Reference

Status
Unknown