Legal Opinion

Coleman-Fire v. Standard Insurance Company

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided February 25, 2020No. 3:18-cv-00180Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON BEN COLEMAN-FIRE, Case No. 3:18-cv-00180-SB Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. BECKERMAN, U.S. Magistrate Judge. The matter before the Court is plaintiff Ben Coleman-Fire’s (“Coleman-Fire”) Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs. (ECF No. 52.) Defendant Standard Insurance Company (“Standard”) acknowledges that Coleman-Fire is entitled to his attorney’s fees and costs, but argues that the hourly rate and number of hours he seeks are not reasonable. (Def.’s Resp. at 1-2.) For the reasons set forth…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. City of Burlington v. DagueSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
  3. Camacho v. Bridgeport Financial, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  4. Welch v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  5. Hummell v. S. E. Rykoff & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API