Legal Opinion
McDermott v. Marcus, Errico, Emmer & Brooks, P.C.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided September 30, 2014No. Civil Action No. 09-10159-MBBPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY (sic) FEES AND COSTS (DOCKET ENTRY # 85)
MARIANNE B. BOWLER, United States Magistrate Judge.
Pending before this court is a motion filed by plaintiff William M. McDermott (“plaintiff’) seeking attorney’s fees in the amount of $59,924.52 and costs in the amount of $2,343.14. (Docket Entry # 85). Defendant Marcus, Errico, Emmer & Brooks, P.C. (“MEEB”), a professional corporation of attorneys located in Brain-tree, Massachusetts that concentrates in condominium law, seeks to eliminate 115.1 of the total 541.15 hours plaintiffs attorney…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- City of Riverside v. RiveraSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Camacho v. Bridgeport Financial, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich, L.P.A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Annabelle Lipsett v. Gumersindo BlancoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- McCulloch v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Saxerud v. T-H Professional and Medical Collections Ltd.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 2021
- Sullivan v. Selene Finance, LPDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2022