Sheppard v. Flemming
| Decision Date | 20 December 1960 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 961. |
| Parties | Watt SHEPPARD, Plaintiff, v. Arthur S. FLEMMING, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia |
W. E. Parsons and Lawrence L. Pauley (Parsons & Gates), Huntington, W. Va., for plaintiff.
Duncan W. Daugherty, U. S. Atty., Huntington, W. Va., for defendant.
A petition has been filed in this Court for the approval of attorney fees charged as a result of the representation of a plaintiff in his appeal from an adverse decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.
The plaintiff in the appeal to this Court had previously applied to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare for allowance of a period of disability under the applicable provisions of the Social Security Act, as amended. After an adverse decision of the Department, he contacted petitioners herein, and requested that they represent him in prosecuting an appeal from the adverse decision, to this Court. On January 19, 1959, petitioners and their client entered into an employment agreement, whereby the compensation of petitioners was fixed at forty percent of recovery and contingent upon recovery.
Pursuant to the employment agreement, petitioners instituted suit in this Court on behalf of their client and with Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, as defendant, on January 23, 1959. Upon motion of the defendant, the cause was remanded to the Secretary for further administrative action by order of this Court, entered April 1, 1959.
On September 14, 1960, the Secretary rendered a decision favorable to the plaintiff, granting the relief sought in the action instituted before this Court, and requesting that the action be dismissed.
Petitioners are desirous of not violating any Federal statute or regulation, and have voluntarily submitted to this Court the question of their right to collect the contingent fee, now amounting to $630.64, and the reasonableness of such a fee. Notice and an opportunity to be heard in this case have been given the United States Attorney, and no objection to such fee arrangement has been made, and no regulation prohibiting such payment has been cited.
Section 206 of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 406, as amended, provides in part:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Webb v. Richardson
...See Swotes v. Gardner, 392 F.2d 428, 431 (3d Cir. 1968); Chernock v. Gardner, 360 F.2d 257, 258-259 (3d Cir. 1967); Sheppard v. Flemming, 189 F.Supp. 571, 572 (S.D.W.Va.1960). Court decisions unanimously held that this statutory provision did not give the Secretary power to establish attorn......
-
Blankenship v. Gardner
...before the Secretary, it did not give the Secretary the power to fix fees for representation on judicial review. Sheppard v. Flemming, 189 F.Supp. 571 (S.D. W.Va.1960). This power of the court prior to the amendment to fix a reasonable fee was conceded by the government in Celebrezze v. Spa......
-
Guido v. Schweiker, 85-3110
...See, e.g., Gonzalez v. Hobby, 213 F.2d 68 (1st Cir.1954); Carroll v. Celebrezze, 228 F.Supp. 24 (N.D.Iowa 1964); Sheppard v. Flemming, 189 F.Supp. 571 (S.D.W.Va.1960). Had Congress disagreed with that line of cases, it could have made its contrary intent clear when it amended the statute. T......
-
Davis v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELF. OF US, EC 6984-K.
...Cir. 1967); Britton v. Gardner, 270 F.Supp. 412 (D.C.Va.1967); Mauldin v. Gardner, 264 F.Supp. 370 (D.C.S.C. 1967); Sheppard v. Flemming, 189 F. Supp. 571 (S.D.W.Va.1960). 3 Gardner v. Menendez, 373 F.2d 488 (1 Cir. 1967). Prior to the 1965 amendment to the Social Security Act, courts had r......