Pock
Pock v. Saul
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 JAMES P., Case No. 19-cv-01354-JSC
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
v. ATTORNEY’S FEES WITHOUT
PREJUDICE
ANDREW SAUL, Re: Dkt. No. 31 Defendant.
14 Plaintiff’s counsel, Harvey Sackett, moves for attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) for representing Plaintiff in his successful appeal of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s denial of social security disability benefits. (Dkt. No. 31.) The motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for the reasons set forth below. Under Section 406(b), a court must serve “as an independent check” of contingency fee agreements “to assure that they yield reasonable results.” Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 807 (2002). The court’s review of a fee agreement is based on the character of the representation and the results achieved, see Gisbrecht, 535 U.S. at 808, and can include analyzing: whether counsel provided substandard representation; any dilatory…