Legal Opinion
BankUnited, N.A. v. Rusty Garretson, et al.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided March 4, 2026No. 1:25-cv-00190Unknown
1Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION - CINCINNATI BANKUNITED, N.A., : Case No. 1:25-cv-190 Plaintiff, Judge Matthew W. McFarland RUSTY GARRETSON, et al., Defendants. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES (Doc. 22) This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys’ Fees Against Defendant Rusty Garretson (Doc. 22). As no response in opposition has been filed, and the time to do so has passed, the Motion is ripe for review. For the reasons stated below, Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. 22) is GRANTED.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Imwalle v. Reliance Medical Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- Hudson v. RenoCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
- Jane M. Wooldridge v. Marlene Industries Corporation and Russell Sportswear CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Charles W. Moore, (01-6372) (01-6536) v. Moses Freeman, in His Individual and Official Capacities, and the City of Chattanooga, (01-6372) (01-6536)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.