Jeter v. Astrue
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
BENAVIDES, Circuit Judge:
We are presented with the question of whether district courts may employ the lodestar method to determine whether an attorney fee constitutes a “windfall” under Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 122 S.Ct. 1817, 152 L.Ed.2d 996 (2002). Because we read Gisbrecht as merely forbidding exclusive reliance on the lodestar method to determine the reasonableness of a 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) attorney fee, we do not conclude that Gisbrecht precludes a court’s consideration of the lodestar method altogether. And since the district court here did not rely exclusively on the lodestar…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Gisbrecht v. BarnhartSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Crawford v. AstrueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Dale Wells, William Hlywa v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appeal of John S. HoggCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Hearn v. BarnhartDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2003
- Rodriquez v. BowenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by184 opinions
- Fields v. KijakaziCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2022
- Christian Arnold v. Martin J. O'MalleyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2024
- Samuel Jackson v. Michael Astrue, CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2013
- In re Heartland Payment Systems, Inc. Customer Data Security Breach LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2012
- Ringel v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2018
179 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.