Tangredi v. Astrue

Tangredi v. Astrue

Plaintiff:	Joan Tangredi
Defendant:	Michael J. Astrue
Case Number:	1:2011cv05836
Filed:	August 19, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Rockland
Presiding Judge:	Ronald L. Ellis
Presiding Judge:	Laura Taylor Swain
Nature of Suit:	Disability Insurance
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
May 26, 2015	Filing 18 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 14 Motion for Attorney Fees filed by Joan Tangredi, 17 Report and Recommendations. On December 1, 2014, Plaintiff's counsel petitioned the Court for attorney's fees for the successful a ppeal of the denial of Plaintiff's past-due Social Security disability benefits. Defendant did not oppose the request. After careful consideration, the Honorable Ronald L. Ellis issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), proposing tha t the fee application in the amount of $15,000 be granted. Despite notification of the right to object to the R&R, no objections were filed, and the time to do so has passed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). When no objection is made, the Court rev iews the R&R for clear error. Santiago v. Colvin, 12 Civ. 7052, 2014 WL 1092967, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2014). The Court finds no clear error. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Ellis's R&R in its entirety. The Clerk of Court is directed to (1) terminate the motion at ECF No. 14, and (2) close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 5/26/2015) (ajs)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 26, 2015

Filing 18 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 14 Motion for Attorney Fees filed by Joan Tangredi, 17 Report and Recommendations. On December 1, 2014, Plaintiff's counsel petitioned the Court for attorney's fees for the successful a ppeal of the denial of Plaintiff's past-due Social Security disability benefits. Defendant did not oppose the request. After careful consideration, the Honorable Ronald L. Ellis issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), proposing tha t the fee application in the amount of $15,000 be granted. Despite notification of the right to object to the R&R, no objections were filed, and the time to do so has passed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). When no objection is made, the Court rev iews the R&R for clear error. Santiago v. Colvin, 12 Civ. 7052, 2014 WL 1092967, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2014). The Court finds no clear error. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Ellis's R&R in its entirety. The Clerk of Court is directed to (1) terminate the motion at ECF No. 14, and (2) close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 5/26/2015) (ajs)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Tangredi v. Astrue
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Joan Tangredi
Represented By:	Lewis Bart Insler
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?