Legal Opinion
Zuraf v. Clearview Eye Care, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided August 11, 2017No. Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-559Published
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Raymond A. Jackson, United States District Judge
Before the Court is Clear View Eye Care Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Attorney Fees pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d). Mot. for Att’y Fees, ECF No. 54. This matter has been fully briefed and is ripe for disposition. A hearing will not aid judicial determination. For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant’s Motion for Attorney Fees is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
*640I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This action arises from Defendant’s alleged wrongful termination of, and failure to hire,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Blanchard v. BergeronSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Perdue v. Kenny A. ex rel. WinnSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.