From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morales v. Saul

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Aug 14, 2020
16-cv-0031 (AJN) (BCM) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 14, 2020)

Opinion

16-cv-0031 (AJN) (BCM)

08-14-2020

Julio Morales, Plaintiff, v. Andrew Saul, Defendant.


ORDER :

Before the Court is Judge Moses's December 16, 2019 Report & Recommendation ("R & R") recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff's motion for an order approving a contingent fee arrangement in this social security case. See Dkt. No. 31.

When considering the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, the Court may "accept, reject, or modify [them], in whole or in part." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court must make a de novo determination of any portions of a magistrate's report, findings, or recommendations to which a party raises an objection, and reviews only for "clear error on the face of the record" when there are no objections to the R & R. Brennan v. Colvin, No. 13-cv-6338 (AJN) (RLE), 2015 WL 1402204, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 25, 2015); see also Hicks v. Ercole, No. 09-cv-2531 (AJN) (MHD), 2015 WL 1266800, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2015); Gomez v. Brown, 655 F. Supp. 2d 332, 341 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). Clear error is found only when, upon review of the entire record, the Court is left with "the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Laster v. Mancini, No. 07-cv-8265 (DAB) (MHD), 2013 WL 5405468, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2013) (quoting United States v. Snow, 462 F.3d 55, 72 (2d Cir. 2006)).

Objections to Judge Moses's R & R were due by December 30, 2019. See Dkt. No. 31 at 5; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed. The Court thus reviews the R & R for clear error and finds none. The Court therefore adopts the R & R in its entirety and GRANTS Plaintiff's motion. The Social Security Administration is hereby directed to approve a payment of $29,000 to Plaintiff's attorney, Christopher J. Bowes, and upon receipt of payment, Mr. Bowes shall promptly refund $5,021 to Plaintiff.

This order resolves Dkt. No. 27.

SO ORDERED. Dated: August 14, 2020

New York, New York

/s/_________

ALISON J. NATHAN

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Morales v. Saul

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Aug 14, 2020
16-cv-0031 (AJN) (BCM) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 14, 2020)
Case details for

Morales v. Saul

Case Details

Full title:Julio Morales, Plaintiff, v. Andrew Saul, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Aug 14, 2020

Citations

16-cv-0031 (AJN) (BCM) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 14, 2020)