Rosen v. LJ Ross Associates, Inc.

E.D. New York

Rosen v. LJ Ross Associates, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York·Decided February 17, 2022·No. 1:19-cv-05516·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

LEA ROSEN, 19-CV-5516 (ARR) (VMS) Plaintiff Opinion & Order — against — Not for electronic or print LJ ROSS ASSOCIATES, INC., publication

Defendant.

ROSS, United States District Judge: This Court has received the Report and Recommendation on the instant case dated January 24, 2022, from the Honorable Vera M. Scanlon, United States Magistrate Judge. No objections have been filed. The Court reviews “de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see also Brissett v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Auth., No. 09-CV-874 (CBA)(LB), 2011 WL 1930682, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. May 19, 2011), aff’d, 472 F. App’x 73 (2d Cir. 2012) (summary order). Where no timely objections have been filed, “the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Finley v. Trans Union, Experian, Equifax, No. 17-CV-0371 (LDH)(LB), 2017 WL 4838764, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 24, 2017) (quoting Estate of Ellington ex rel. Ellington v. Harbrew Imports Ltd., 812 F. Supp. 2d 186, 189 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)). Having reviewed the record, I find no clear error. I therefore adopt the Report and Recommendation, in its entirety, as the opinion of the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff shall be awarded $24,404.10 in attorneys’ fees and $400.00 in costs for a total award of $24,804.10. SO ORDERED. _______/s/________________ Allyne R. Ross United States District Judge

Dated: February 17, 2022 Brooklyn, New York

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

LEA ROSEN, 19-CV-5516 (ARR) (VMS) Plaintiff Opinion & Order — against — Not for electronic or print LJ ROSS ASSOCIATES, INC., publication

Defendant.

ROSS, United States District Judge: This Court has received the Report and Recommendation on the instant case dated January 24, 2022, from the Honorable Vera M. Scanlon, United States Magistrate Judge. No objections have been filed. The Court reviews “de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see also Brissett v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Auth., No. 09-CV-874 (CBA)(LB), 2011 WL 1930682, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. May 19, 2011), aff’d, 472 F. App’x 73 (2d Cir. 2012) (summary order). Where no timely objections have been filed, “the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Finley v. Trans Union, Experian, Equifax, No. 17-CV-0371 (LDH)(LB), 2017 WL 4838764, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 24, 2017) (quoting Estate of Ellington ex rel. Ellington v. Harbrew Imports Ltd., 812 F. Supp. 2d 186, 189 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)). Having reviewed the record, I find no clear error. I therefore adopt the Report and Recommendation, in its entirety, as the opinion of the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff shall be awarded $24,404.10 in attorneys’ fees and $400.00 in costs for a total award of $24,804.10. SO ORDERED. _______/s/________________ Allyne R. Ross United States District Judge

Dated: February 17, 2022 Brooklyn, New York

Rosen v. LJ Ross Associates, Inc., (E.D.N.Y. 2022).

Pincite

Rosen v. LJ Ross Associates, Inc. (Rosen v. LJ Ross Associates, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related