Berryhill

Alicia De Santiago v. Berryhill

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 3, 20213:19-cv-00935California553 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BERTHA ALICIA D.S., Case No.: 3:19-cv-0935-AGS Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) FEES (ECF 24) v. Kilolo KIJAKAZI, Defendant. 15 Plaintiff’s counsel moves for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Counsel requests “$4,911.00” with “an order to reimburse [plaintiff] the amount of $2,800.00 for EAJA fees previously paid.” (ECF 24, at 1.) The current request represents about 12% of plaintiff’s past due benefits. Plaintiff was served with the motion and given an opportunity to object. (See ECF 24, at 1.) To date, she hasn’t. Section 406(b) provides that “[w]henever a court renders a judgment favorable to a claimant,” “the court may determine and allow as part of its judgment a reasonable fee for such representation, not in excess of 25 percent of the total of the past-due benefits . . . .” 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). “In contrast to fees awarded under fee-shifting provisions such as 42 U.S.C. § 1988, the fee is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.