WHITE
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court accepts and adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the Plaintiff's Petition for Attorney Fees.
Plaintiff filed a Petition for Attorney Fees. The United States Magistrate Judge recommended granting the petition. No objections were filed.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Magistrate Judge'S Report And Recommendation Review cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter comes before the Court upon consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 33), entered on May 20, 2024, recommending that the Plaintiff’s Petition for Attorney Fees (Doc. # 32) be granted. No objections have been filed and the time to file objections has expired.
The Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation and grants the Motion.
Discussion
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). In the absence of
1
specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). If a party files a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact by the magistrate judge, the district court must conduct a de novo review with respect to that factual issue. Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F. 2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff’d, 28 F. 3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994).
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 33) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.
2
(2) Plaintiff’s Petition for Attorney Fees (Doc. # 32) is GRANTED. Plaintiff is awarded $3,118.90 in attorney’s fees.
(3) The Clerk is directed to enter an amended judgment accordingly.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 4th day of June, 2024.
Virginia M. Hernandez Covington
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 1993 WL 259424 (S.D. Fla. 1993)
- Durham Eldon Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1567 (11th Cir. 1992)