Legal Opinion
Naegele v. Albers
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided February 21, 2012No. Civil Action No. 2003-2507PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Denying the Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order
RICARDO M. URBINA, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order. The plaintiff is an attorney who contends that the defendants, his former clients, failed to pay him for certain legal services. The defendants maintain that they were overcharged and should not be required to pay for the plaintiffs services. After this fee dispute arose, the defendants sought resolution of this matter via arbitration in California. The plaintiff now…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
- City of Los Angeles v. LyonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Mazurek v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Munaf v. GerenSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Amoco Production Co. v. Village of GambellSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bricklayers & Trowel Trades Int'l Pension Fund v. Kel-Tech Constr., Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Naegele v. AlbersDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Roggio v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Albers v. Naegele CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2013
- Roggio v. Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.