DAMI
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 granted the plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).
Plaintiff's counsel sought attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). The Magistrate Judge recommended granting the motion. Plaintiff withdrew objections…
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 is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli’s Amended Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 34), filed on February 11, 2021, recommending that Plaintiff’s Attorneys’ Unopposed Motion for Award of Attorney Fees Under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) (Doc. # 29) be granted and Plaintiff’s counsel be awarded attorneys’ fees in the amount of $26,207.58. Although Plaintiff Dami objected to the initial Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 32), upon filing of the Amended Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff Dami withdrew her objection. (Doc. # 35).
As of the date of this Order, no objections to the Amended Report and Recommendation have been filed. The time for filing objections has lapsed. The Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation and grants the motion for award of attorneys’ fees. 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 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). 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 Amended Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 34) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. (2) Plaintiff’s Attorneys’ Unopposed Motion for Award of Attorney Fees Under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) (Doc. # 29) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s counsel is awarded attorneys’ fees in the amount of $26,207.58 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 3rd day of March, 2021. lagi 9n. Munenby Cree VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ*COVINGTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Marina Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 1993 WL 259424 (S.D. Fla. 1993)