Cautillo v. Berryhill

Cautillo v. Berryhill

Plaintiff:	Vincent R. Cautillo
Defendant:	Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number:	7:2017cv01356
Filed:	February 23, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge:	Katherine Polk Failla
Nature of Suit:	Retirement and Survivors Benefits
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
March 12, 2019	Filing 28 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 20 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act. filed by Vincent R. Cautillo. For the foregoing reasons, the Court awards attorney's fees in the amount of $9,687.08, comprisin g 43.90 hours of attorney time at a rate of $196.79 per hour and 13.10 hours of paralegal time at a rate of $80.00 per hour, as well as costs in the amount of $426.91. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 20. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 3/12/2019) (js)
March 12, 2018	Filing 18 OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 17 Report and Recommendations. For the foregoing reasons, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Freeman's Report in full. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that Plaintiff's motion fo r judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED, Defendant's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED, and the case is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 3/12/2018) (kgo)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 12, 2019

Filing 28 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 20 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act. filed by Vincent R. Cautillo. For the foregoing reasons, the Court awards attorney's fees in the amount of $9,687.08, comprisin g 43.90 hours of attorney time at a rate of $196.79 per hour and 13.10 hours of paralegal time at a rate of $80.00 per hour, as well as costs in the amount of $426.91. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 20. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 3/12/2019) (js)

March 12, 2018

Filing 18 OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 17 Report and Recommendations. For the foregoing reasons, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Freeman's Report in full. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that Plaintiff's motion fo r judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED, Defendant's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED, and the case is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 3/12/2018) (kgo)

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: Cautillo v. Berryhill
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Vincent R. Cautillo
Represented By:	Gary James Gogerty
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: Nancy A. Berryhill
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?