Legal Opinion

Grissom v. Antero Resources Corporation

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided July 2, 2025No. 2:20-cv-02028Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION THE GRISSOMS, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No. 2:20-cv-2028 v. JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. Deavers ANTERO RESOURCES CORPORATION, Defendant. ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff The Grissoms, LLC’s Motion to Approve Notice Plan Regarding Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. (ECF No. 157.) Defendant Antero Resources Corporation does not oppose the Motion. (Id.) For the reasons stated below, the Motion is GRANTED IN PART. (Id.) I. BACKGROUND In 2023, this Court denied Antero’s…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
  3. The Grissoms, LLC v. Antero Resources Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API