Legal Opinion
Friedmann v. Franklin Pierce Public Schools
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided January 21, 2025No. 3:22-cv-06010Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 MICHAEL FRIEDMANN, CASE NO. 3:22-cv-06010-LK 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 12 v. ATTORNEY’S FEES 13 FRANKLIN PIERCE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees, Dkt. No. 17 58, following the Court’s order granting Defendants’ dispositive motion on all claims, Dkt. No. 18 53. For the reasons below, the Court denies Defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees.1 19 I. BACKGROUND 20 This matter arose out of Plaintiff Michael…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Fox v. ViceSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Margolis v. RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Ernest J. Franceschi, Jr., Esq. v. Kenneth Schwartz, Commissioner of South Orange County Municipal CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Edmund A. Rachel, AKA Peter Rachel, D/B/A Wildlife Interiors, Plaintiff v. Banana Republic, Inc., Fisher Development, Inc., and the Gap, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.