Legal Opinion
Hanrahan v. Statewide Collection, INC.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided June 14, 2021No. 3:19-cv-00157Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 LEAH HANRAHAN, Case No. 19-cv-00157-MMC 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 9 v. DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES 10 STATEWIDE COLLECTION, INC., AND COSTS 11 Defendant. 12 13 Before the Court is plaintiff Leah Hanrahan’s (“Hanrahan”) “Motion for Attorney’s 14 Fees and Costs,” filed March 25, 2021. Defendant Statewide Collection, Inc. 15 (“Statewide”) has filed opposition, to which Hanrahan has replied. Having read and 16 considered the papers submitted in support of and in…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Marek v. ChesnySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Camacho v. Bridgeport Financial, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Moreno v. City of SacramentoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Nadarajah v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. Ofray-CamposCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2008
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.