🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Lurana S. Snow

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida magistrate 16 signed orders read

How Judge Snow decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On the reviewed prevailing-party fee request, she applied the lodestar method, assessed the requested rates and hours independently, and recommended the full amount when it was supported and unopposed.

“the claimed rates of $250.00 - $405.00 per hour is within the range of rates charged in the Southern District of Florida for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skills, experience and reputation ... the requested fee award of $101,927.24 should be granted.”

In the reviewed Social Security appeals, she examined each stage of the administrative analysis and recommended remand when findings on impairment severity, treating-source evidence, or vocational testimony lacked adequate support.

“RECOMMENDED that the plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 11) be GRANTED, in part, in that the case should be remanded to the Commissioner for a determination of: (1) whether the plaintiff's impairments ... were ‘severe’ at step two ...; (2) whether ... the opinion of the plaintiff's treating physician should be given less than considerable weight”

Procedural preferences

Strictly enforces Rule 11's safe-harbor: a sanctions/fee motion not served separately on the opponent 21 days before filing (and filed only after dismissal, leaving nothing to withdraw) is barred outright, independent of the merits.

“Failure to give the opposing party the 21-day ‘safe harbor’ provision forecloses relief under Rule 11 ... Rule 11 requires that the motion itself be served on the plaintiff, and failure to comply with that requirement is fatal.”

Awards taxable costs to the prevailing party under Rule 54(d)/28 U.S.C. 1920 but trims to statutorily recoverable items (e.g. excludes a non-taxable expedited deposition-transcript excerpt) and fixes post-judgment interest from the merits-judgment date.

“the total of taxable costs is $6,927.44 ($350.00 + $385.00 + $5,871.60 + $320.84).”

Cautions

She recommended affirmance when the claimant did not identify a specific, record-supported defect in the administrative findings, including after considering objections to the recommendation.

“the Report and Recommendation ... recommends that the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 15] be denied”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Costas v. Astrue (Comm'r of Social Security)
0:06-cv-60669-JIC
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“the Report and Recommendation ... recommends that the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 15] be denied”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ... The Report and Recommendation [DE 20] of United States Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow, dated April 4, 2007 is ADOPTED”

Boehm v. Astrue (Comm'r of Social Security)
0:08-cv-60528-WJZ
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“RECOMMENDED that the plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 11) be GRANTED, in part, in that the case should be remanded to the Commissioner for a determination of: (1) whether the plaintiff's impairments ... were ‘severe’ at step two ...; (2) whether ... the opinion of the plaintiff's treating physician should be given less than considerable weight ...; (3) whether ... jobs exist in the national economy which the plaintiff can perform.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“RECOMMENDED that the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 16) be DENIED.”

Nettles v. Total Comfort Plumbing
0:08-cv-61426-WPD
Motion to tax costs (defendant) Granted

“RECOMMENDED that the motion be GRANTED, and that the defendants recover costs of $1,114.50, comprising $99.15 for copying costs and $1,015.35 for deposition transcripts, plus interest at the rate of 0.47% from July 31, 2009.”

Balboa Capital Corp. v. Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (d/b/a VPX Sports) & John Owoc
0:18-cv-61125-WPD
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted

“RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Verified Motion for Attorney's Fees and Non-Taxable Expenses and Costs (ECF No. 82) be GRANTED, and that the Plaintiff be awarded attorneys' fees in the amount of $101,927.24, litigation expenses in the amount of $4,650.00 and costs in the amount of $425.00.”

Allied World Specialty Insurance Co. v. Caribe Utilities of Florida, Inc.
0:19-cv-60367-WPD
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted

“RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Verified Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees and Nontaxable Expenses and Costs Against Defendants (ECF No. 93) and Bill of Costs (ECF No. 94) be GRANTED, and that the Plaintiff be awarded attorneys' fees in the amount of $71,461.50 and costs in the amount of $634.81.”

GEICO General Insurance Co. v. Hampel
0:11-cv-61620-WPD
Motion for attorney fees (defendant) Denied

“RECOMMENDED that Defendant Noreen Hampel's Motion for Attorneys' Fees (DE 13) be DENIED, and that the Court decline to award attorney's fees to the plaintiff for the defense of the motion.”

Backhus v. Tejo Limited, Inc.
9:09-cv-80854-WPD
Motion to amend judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“1. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow, dated June 23, 2010 [DE 23] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED; 2. Plaintiff Scott W. Backhus's Motion to Amend Judgment against Defendants for Failure to Pay Settlement Payment [DE 16] is hereby GRANTED.”

TEC Serv, LLC v. Crabb (Toscano third-party defendants)
0:11-cv-62040-WPD
Motion for attorney fees (defendant) Granted in part

“RECOMMENDED that Third Party Defendants' John Toscano and Marilyn Toscano's Motion for an Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees and Accounting Fees Incurred at the Trial Level (ECF No. 306) ... and ... Verified Motion to Tax Costs (ECF No. 247) be GRANTED, in part, and that the Third Party Defendants be awarded $250,000.00 for attorneys' fees and accounting expenses and $6,927.44 in taxable costs.”

Robinson v. Saul (Comm'r of Social Security)
0:20-cv-60564-WPD
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“RECOMMENDED that the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED, and the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Roget v. Kijakazi (Comm'r of Social Security)
0:20-cv-61719-WPD
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“RECOMMENDED that the Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 31) be DENIED and the Commissioner's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 27) be GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Edison v. Berryhill (Comm'r of Social Security)
0:18-cv-60923-LSS
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 21) be GRANTED, and the Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 19) be DENIED.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 18) is DENIED as moot.”

Bamberg v. The Results Companies, LLC
0:20-cv-61420-WPD
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant The Results Companies, LLC's Omnibus Motion [DE 34] is hereby GRANTED with regard to Part (2), Defendant's motion for dismissal without prejudice of the claims brought by seventy-three (73) of the remaining plaintiffs in this case ... b. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the claims of those 73 plaintiffs.”

Put Judge Snow's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Snow actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Snow's own signed orders and cites them.