Legal Opinion
DOES I, II, III v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided September 5, 2006No. Civil Action 02-2338 (RMU)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
RICARDO M. URBINA, District Judge.
Granting in Part and Denying in Part the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
I.INTRODUCTION
The plaintiffs, female emergency medical technicians with the District of Columbia’s Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department (“FEMSD”), filed this action in 2002, alleging sex discrimination and deprivation of constitutional rights. The parties settled the suit in September 2005 and, pursuant to the settlement agreement, the case is now before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. Because the plaintiffs…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Missouri v. Jenkins Ex Rel. AgyeiSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Save Our Cumberland Mountains, Inc. v. Donald P. Hodel, Secretary of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1988
- In Re Theodore B. OLSONCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lively v. Flexible Packaging Ass'nDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
- Craig v. Metropolitan Police DepartmentDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Tridico v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Potter v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of MichiganDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2014
- Robinson v. Dist. of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.