Culbertson v. Berryhill

Whether fees subject to 42 U. S. C. 406(b)’s 25-percent cap include, as the Sixth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits hold, only fees for representation in court or, as the Fourth, Fifth, and Eleventh Circuits hold, also fees for representation before the agency.

Petitioner successfully represented clients who were initially denied but later awarded Social Security disability benefits. Petitioner sought attorney’s fees for his representation before the agency pursuant to § 406(a), as well as attorney’s fees for his representation in federal district court pursuant to § 406(b). The Eleventh Circuit held that § 406(b) provides a 25-percent cap on attorney’s fees awarded under § 406(a) and § 406(b) but acknowledged that other circuits “do not apply the 25-percent limit in § 406(b) to the aggregate fee award under § 406.” Petitioner urged the Supreme Court to resolve the circuit split regarding whether § 406(b)’s 25-percent limit on attorney’s fees applies only to attorney’s fees under § 406(b) or to the combined attorney’s fees under § 406(a) and § 406(b). Petitioner argues that three circuits held that the limitation only applies to attorney’s fees for representation in court. Petitioner relies on the plain language of the statute and the legislative history, which only shows a concern for large fees derived from representation in federal district court. Further, Petitioner argues, § 406(a) allows for the agency to approve attorney’s fees that are “reasonable,” rather than placing a percentage limitation. Petitioner overall argues that § 406(a) and § 406(b) are separate and distinct avenues for collecting attorney’s fees that are subject to different limitations.