Susca v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Analisa Torres
- 1:20-cv-09592
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Susca v. Commissioner, Judge Torres adopted a recommendation awarding $10,800 in attorney’s fees from past-due benefits and requiring an EAJA refund.
Giselle Susca and her counsel, Chermol & Fishman, are affected by the $10,800 attorney’s-fee award, its payment from Susca’s past-due benefits, and the required $2,235 refund to Susca.
What happened
In Susca v. Commissioner of Social Security, Giselle Susca challenged the denial of disability insurance benefits. The parties later agreed to reverse that decision and send the case back for more administrative proceedings.
Susca’s attorney moved for an additional fee award under federal law. Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo recommended granting the motion but reducing the award to $10,800, paid from Susca’s past-due benefits, with Chermol & Fishman required to refund $2,235 in previously awarded fees to Susca.
No one objected to the recommendation, and Judge Analisa Torres found no clear error. Judge Torres adopted the recommendation in its entirety and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment consistent with the order and recommendation.
The detailed version
- Susca v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-09592
- Analisa Torres
- Aug. 22, 2024
Background
Giselle Susca filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision denying her disability insurance benefits. The parties later stipulated to reverse the Commissioner’s decision and remand the case for further administrative proceedings.
Attorney’s-Fee Motion
Susca’s counsel moved for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). The motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo, who issued a Report and Recommendation. The recommendation proposed that the motion be granted but that the fee award be reduced to $10,800. It also recommended that the award be paid from Susca’s past-due benefits and that, after receiving the § 406(b) award, Chermol & Fishman refund $2,235 in previously awarded fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act to Susca.
Court’s Ruling
No objections were filed, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. Judge Analisa Torres found no clear error in the recommendation and adopted it in its entirety. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment consistent with the order and the recommendation.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.