Legal Opinion
Akers v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided June 12, 1992No. 91-5544PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
SILER, Circuit Judge.
Appellant, Wolodymyr Cybriwsky (“counsel”), appeals the district court’s order, which calculated counsel’s fee based solely on the accrued benefits, excluding interim benefits. under 42 U.S.C. § 423(g)(1), paid to plaintiff, George L. Ak-ers (“claimant”). The issue is whether claimant’s interim benefits are “past-due benefits” under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) for purposes of calculating counsel’s fee. For the following reasons, we REVERSE the district court’s order.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
In October, 1987, the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) decided that claimant’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Buford Gowen v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Louie v. Pittman v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1989
- Richard J. Getty v. Scott Reed, John W. Collis v. Scott ReedCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977
- Mary E. SHOEMAKER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1988
- Nazaria Rodriguez v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- George L. Akers v. Secretary Of Health And Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992