## Facts

- Mary B. Chynoweth, a 56-year-old widow with significant health problems, applied for Social Security disabled widow’s insurance benefits in 1984.
- The agency denied benefits after an administrative hearing, and the denial was affirmed administratively.
- Chynoweth sought judicial review in federal district court.
- The district court ruled the agency failed to consider her impairments in combination and remanded.
- On remand, the ALJ found Chynoweth entitled to benefits.
- As the prevailing party, Chynoweth sought attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) at $130 per hour, asserting her lawyer’s Social Security disability expertise was a “special factor” allowing a rate above the statutory cap.
- She submitted evidence that counsel specialized in Social Security benefits litigation and affidavits stating few local lawyers handled such cases and that $130 per hour was reasonable.
- The district court found the government’s position not substantially justified, awarded EAJA fees, increased the hourly rate only for cost of living, and refused any further increase based on “special factor.”

## Issues

1. Whether an attorney’s specialization in Social Security disability law qualifies as a “special factor” under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A)(ii) permitting EAJA fees above the statutory hourly cap beyond cost-of-living adjustments.
2. Whether evidence that few attorneys in the relevant area are willing to handle Social Security disability cases justifies exceeding the EAJA cap as “limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings involved.”

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed the fee award.
- The court held that counsel’s Social Security disability expertise did not constitute a “special factor” authorizing an hourly rate above the EAJA cap, apart from permitted cost-of-living adjustments.
- The court concluded the showing of limited attorney availability was insufficient to trigger the statutory exception.

## Legal Principles

- Under EAJA, attorney fees generally may not exceed the statutory hourly cap unless a cost-of-living increase or a “special factor” justifies a higher rate. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A)(ii).
- The “special factor” exception is construed narrowly; it is not satisfied by ordinary subject-matter specialization that would otherwise routinely defeat the cap.
- A qualifying “special factor” requires distinctive knowledge or specialized skill necessary to the litigation and not commonly available; routine federal practice experience in a recurring benefits area is ordinarily insufficient.
- Claims of “limited availability” must show scarcity of attorneys with the necessary specialized qualifications for the particular proceedings, not merely that relatively few lawyers choose to take such cases at capped rates.
- Cost-of-living adjustments are expressly permitted and may support an hourly rate above the cap without establishing a “special factor.”

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit upheld an EAJA fee rate increased only for cost of living, ruling that specialization in Social Security disability law and generalized evidence of limited local willingness to take such cases did not satisfy EAJA’s narrow “special factor” exception for fees above the statutory cap.


Chynoweth v. Sullivan, 920 F.2d 648 (10th Cir. 1990)