Legal Opinion

Schultz v. NW Permanente P.C.

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided August 31, 2022No. 3:20-cv-00626Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON ANGELA SCHULTZ, Case No. 3:20-cv-00626-IM Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. NW PERMANENTE P.C., an Oregon limited liability company and abn NW PERMANENTE PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS, P.C., Defendant. IMMERGUT, District Judge. Before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees, costs, and postjudgment interest, ECF 119; Plaintiff’s bill of costs, ECF 121; and Defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, ECF 135. Plaintiff’s motions for fees and costs are GRANTED as modified by this order. Defendant’s motion for…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. City of Burlington v. DagueSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
  5. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. DuncanSupreme Court of the United States · 1940

14 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