Legal Opinion
Rouse v. Target Corp.
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided January 26, 2016No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-CV-48PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS
GEORGE C. HANKS, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Defendant’s Response in Opposition. Dkts. 30, *38331. Having considered the parties’ filings, the responses and replies thereto, and the applicable law, the Court finds Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees should be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Accordingly, the Court awards $23,750.00 in fees and $1,161.73 in court costs to Plaintiffs.
BACKGROUND
On March 3, 2015, Bobby Rouse (“Rouse”), individually and on behalf of all…
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
- Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. KellstromCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995
- Hollis Watkins v. Kirk Fordice, Governor of the State of MississippiCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- Saizan v. Delta Concrete Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2006
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Quiles v. Parent, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Ramirez v. Lewis Energy Group, L.P.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2016
- Almanza v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
- Almanza v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
- Calsep A/S v. Intelligent Petroleum Software Solutions, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2022
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.