top of page

Remanded Case from the Seventh Circuit

Feb 17, 2025
2 min read
social security cases tower law group

We're pleased to share with you that, on July 1, 2024, the Seventh Circuit issued a remand!


In Arnold v. Commissioner of Social Security, the Seventh Circuit recently tackled the complex issue of attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) post-Gisbrecht. Arnold's case, initially denied but remanded by the district court, resulted in a favorable ALJ decision awarding $160,797.10 in past-due benefits.

Arnold’s legal team sought fees based on a contingency agreement, capped at 25% of past-due benefits.


However, the district court opted to reduce this significantly, awarding only $16,920 instead of the requested $40,199.27, citing concerns over a perceived "windfall" based on hourly rates.


Central to the case was whether the district court properly applied § 406(b) standards in light of Gisbrecht v. Barnhart (2002), which underscores the importance of contingency fee agreements while allowing courts to ensure fees remain reasonable.


The Seventh Circuit determined that the district court erred in not giving sufficient weight to the contingency agreement, instead focusing too heavily on hourly rates—a departure from Gisbrecht’s directive.


Key Points


1. The Seventh Circuit criticized the district court for not starting its analysis with the contingency fee agreement, adjusting only as necessary based on specific considerations.


2. Comparisons to unrelated Second Amendment cases using the lodestar method were deemed inappropriate, as they differ fundamentally from § 406(b) cases analyzed under Gisbrecht.


3. The Seventh Circuit emphasized that the district court’s assessment of the case’s lack of extraordinary challenges did not justify such a substantial fee reduction without a proper analysis grounded in the contingency agreement.


In response, the Seventh Circuit vacated the decision and remanded the case, instructing the district court to reassess the fee request using the correct legal standards, with the contingency fee agreement as the primary consideration.


Got any questions? Schedule a consultation with us. I’m here to help. It’s a lot to take in, but we’ll get through it together. After all, navigating these waters is always easier when you’ve got someone to chat with.

alt="Tower Law Group homepage"
Phone Icon - TLG Yellow

STAY UP TO DATE

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay up to date with Tower Law Group®.

Facebook Logo - Gold
IG Logo - Gold
TLG X Logo
TLG Linked In Footer Logo

 

Copyright © 2026 Tower Law Group® All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy  | Disclaimer  | Law Firm Accessibility Statement  |  Terms of Use​​​​​​​​​​​

 

​​​​​​

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: 

​

We appreciate your interest in Tower Law Group®. This website is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. Visitors should not act or rely on any information on this site without first consulting a qualified attorney.

​

Your use of this website or submission of information does not create an attorney-client relationship with Tower Law Group® or any of its attorneys. Please do not send confidential or sensitive information through this website or via email.

​

An attorney-client relationship is only formed after Tower Law Group® confirms that it does not have a conflict of interest and agrees to represent you.

​

Any information submitted prior to such confirmation will not be treated as confidential and will not prevent Tower Law Group® from representing other clients with adverse interests.

​

 

This website was last updated on June 4, 2026 to reflect current legal information, statutes, and guidance.​

bottom of page