Herlickman

Herlickman v. Saul

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 13, 20233:19-cv-02446-AGSCalifornia876 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BARRY H., Case No.: 3:19-cv-2446-AGS Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) FEES (ECF 26) v. Kilolo KIJAKAZI, Defendant. 8 Plaintiff’s counsel moves for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Counsel requests $16,102.00, offset by an order “to reimburse [plaintiff] the amount of $3,600.00 for the EAJA fees previously paid.” (ECF 26-1, at 1.) This request represents just under 25% of plaintiff’s past-due benefits, which total $64,408.70. (ECF 26-4, at 2.) Plaintiff has not objected. (See ECF 26-1, at 19; ECF 27.) “Whenever 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 evaluating an attorney-fee request, courts “must respect the primacy of lawful attorney- client fee arrangements,” “looking first to the contingent-fee…

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.