U.S. District Court, Western District of New York Case Summaries:

Daily Record (Rochester, NY), Sep 3, 2008

U.S. District Court, Western District of New York

Social Security

Filing of Application

Larocque v. Astrue

06-CV-0316

Judge Telesca

Background: The plaintiff brought suit for judicial review of the Social Security determination finding her eligible for Supplemental Security Income benefits only as of Oct. 27, 2004. The parties moved for judgment on the pleadings. In October 1995, the plaintiff filed for, and was awarded, SSI benefits due to a bipolar disorder. The plaintiff received benefits until January 1999, when her medical condition improved and she was able to return to work. She stopped working again Aug. 15, 2000, and filed another application for benefits in 2001; however, there was no record that the plaintiff's March 2001 application was for both Title II and Title XVI benefits. Benefits were awarded as of the 2004 hearing date.

Ruling: The earliest month for which SSI benefits can be paid is the month following the month in which the application is filed. Because the plaintiff did not submit any evidence to prove she filed another SSI application for the 2001 to 2004 period, the ALJ's finding that the plaintiff was disabled only since October 2004 is affirmed.

Dennis A. Clary for the plaintiff, and Kevin D. Robinson, U.S. Attorney's Office, for the defendant

Legal Fees

Thall v. Barnhart

06-CV-6177

Judge Telesca

Background: The plaintiff filed suit in March of 2006 seeking reversal of the commissioner's decision to deny his application for disability income benefits. Eventually it was determined that the plaintiff was disabled, and he was awarded disability benefits, including past due benefits in an amount in excess of $40,000. The plaintiff's attorney, Mark McDonald, seeks an award of $4,497 in fees based on his representation of the plaintiff. McDonald relies on a fee agreement in which Thall agreed to pay the greater of 25 percent of any past due benefits awarded, or the full amount of any fees awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act. Even though $9,497 is the actual amount due to the attorney under the agreement, he had agreed to accept half of that amount. The plaintiff objected to the fee after the award was obtained.

Ruling: The court finds that while the fee agreement was reasonable, the $4,497 would be a "windfall" for the attorney: "According to McDonald's own billing records, he spent a total of 2.05 hours representing Thall in federal court. The award sought by McDonald would equate to a billing rate of $2,316.41 per hour." Noting the risk attorneys assume in taking such a case, and the possibility of no compensation at all, the court awards the attorney $1,000, which is in addition to the $5,300 he received for work before the Social Security Administration.

Mark M. McDonald for the plaintiff, and Christopher V. Taffe, U.S. Attorney's Office, for the defendant.