Broushet v. Target Corp.
District Court, E.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
A. KATHLEEN TOMLINSON, United States Magistrate Judge:
I. Preliminary Statement
Presently before the Court is Defendant Target Corporation’s (“Target”) letter motion requesting the Court to set the fee Target must pay to take the deposition of Plaintiffs expert, Sebastian Lattuga (“Dr. Lattuga”). See DE 21. Prior to the deposition, Defendant received an invoice from Dr. Lattuga requesting payment of $8,400 or $600 per hour for 12 hours of preparation for the deposition and two hours for the deposition itself. Id. at 1 and Ex. 2. Although Defendant does not dispute that it is required to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Magee v. Paul Revere Life InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1997
- New York v. Solvent Chemical Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 2002
- Coleman v. DydulaDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1999
- Mathis v. NYNEXDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1996
3Cited by14 opinions
- Korabik v. Arcelormittal Plate LLCDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2015
- Bean-Sasser v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- Clemmons v. Flora Food US Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2025
- G.C. v. South Washington County School District 833District Court, D. Minnesota · 2019
- Jusino v. LapentaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.