Puccio v. Love
District Court, S.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSEPH PUCCIO and MARCIA Case No.: 16-cv-02890 W (BGS) PUCCIO, 12 ORDER: Plaintiffs, 13 v. GRANTING IN PART AND 14 DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ FRANKLIN J. LOVE, and CMRE 15 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES FINANCIAL SERVICES, AND LITIGATION EXPENSES 16 Defendants. [DOC. 56] 17 18 19 20 21 Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees [Doc. 56]. The 22 Court decides the matters without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). 23 For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS IN PART…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Missouri v. Jenkins Ex Rel. AgyeiSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Dolores J. Copeland, Individually and on Behalf of the Class of All Others Similarly Situated v. F. Ray Marshall, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Camacho v. Bridgeport Financial, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.