Legal Opinion
Schmitz-Werke GmbH + Co. v. Rockland Industries, Inc.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided July 9, 2003No. CIV.A.CCB-97-4353PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
BLAKE, District Judge.
On December 30, 1999, after a bench trial, judgment was entered on behalf of Plaintiff. Plaintiff then filed a bill of costs seeking- a total of $6,454.27. A decision on the bill of costs was deferred while the case was on appeal. After the judgment was affirmed, the Clerk awarded Plaintiff $2,232.89 of the costs originally sought. Plaintiff seeks review of that decision.
The Clerk did not award Plaintiff $50.00 which it sought for the pro hac vice fee paid by one of its attorneys, Daniel F. Crowley. There is a split of authority over whether pro hac vice fees…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Soberay MacHine & Equipment Company, (96-3946 97-3308)/cross-Appellee v. Mrf Limited, Inc., Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant (96-3997)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- Electronic Specialty Co. v. International Controls Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1987
- Mastrapas v. New York Life InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1982
- Eagle Insurance v. JohnsonDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Nicola v. Washington Times Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- Johnson v. HolwayDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007
- Merix Pharmaceutical Corp. v. Clinical Supplies Management, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2015
- Borum v. Brentwood Village, LLCDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2020
- Phillips and Jordan Inc v. McCarthy Improvement IncDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2021
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.