Nieves v. Colvin
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|January 24, 2018
ORDER: for 24 Motion for Attorney Fees filed by Lourdes Nieves, 30 Report and Recommendations. This Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Gorenstein's thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, and finds that it is not erroneou s on its face. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, this Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The parties' failure to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation precludes appellate review of thi s decision. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985). Nieves' motion for approval of the contingent fee agreement is granted. The Social Security Administration is directed to approve a fees award of $41,878.00 out of the past due Soci al Security benefits payable to Nieves and her daughter, less the $7,200.00 already paid to Bowes under the Equal Access to Justice Act, for a net payment of $34,678.00. Motions terminated: 24 MOTION for Attorney Fees Approving Contingent Fee Agreement Pursuant to 42 USC section 406(b,) filed by Lourdes Nieves. (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 1/24/2018) (ap)
|December 26, 2017
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: re: 24 MOTION for Attorney Fees Approving Contingent Fee Agreement Pursuant to 42 USC section 406(b) filed by Lourdes Nieves. Accordingly, counsel's request for an award of $34,678 should be granted. Objections to R&R due by 1/9/2018 (Signed by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein on 12/26/2017) (ama) Modified on 12/26/2017 (ama).
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
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?