Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Richardson

District Court, D. North Dakota

Decided May 30, 2001No. 4:99-k-00008Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

WEBB, Chief Judge.

I. Introduction

Before the Court are defendant’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and plaintiffs application for attorney’s fees, costs, and damages (doc.’s # 45, 43). Each party opposes the other’s motion (doc. #47, 48). For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law is DENIED. Plaintiffs application for fees, costs and damages is DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART, as set forth in detail below.

II. Defendant’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law

At the close of evidence, defendant moved…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Tanner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. H. Anita Lincoln, Cross-Appellant v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, and Clyde W. Hall and Evanel R. Terrell, Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
  4. Kerry D. Ogden v. Wax Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
  5. Laverne Belk v. City of Eldon, Scott Harrison, Steve Wood, Brad Veach, Ron BlyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API