Legal Opinion
Stiltner v. Califano
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Decided October 19, 1977No. CIV-2-76-114PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
NEESE, District Judge.
The Court rendered a judgment herein favorable to the plaintiff, see interlocutory judgment of April 29, 1977 herein. The attorney who represented him before this Court petitioned the Court to determine and allow him as part of its judgment herein a reasonable fee for such representation. 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1). It is claimed in such petition that such attorney devoted 52% hours to such representation; however, he included in his computation a claim (which is DISALLOWED) that he devoted an aggregate of 18 of those hours to a quarterly “review”…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Glendal B. Webb v. Elliot L. RichardsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1972
- John S. MacDonald v. Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Redden v. CelebrezzeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1966
- Lovel Redden v. John W. Gardner, Secretary of Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1968
3Cited by3 opinions
- Taylor v. HecklerDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1985
- Burris v. HecklerDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1984
- Ramos Colon v. Secretary of Health & Human ServicesDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1987