NETBANK v. COMMERCIAL MONEY CENTER, 2:02-CV-01051-KJD-LRL. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20120309b15
Visitors: 14
Filed: Mar. 07, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 07, 2012
Summary: ORDER KENT J. DAWSON, District Judge. Before the Court is Plaintiff Netbank's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (#226). No opposition has been filed. Plaintiff requests $7,058,504.93 in fees and $948,620.75 in costs. Plaintiff has prevailed in this action and contends that the Sales and Servicing Agreements entered into by the parties authorizes an award of fees and costs. Plaintiff also submits affidavits to support the amount requested. The Motion appears to be supported by good cause.
Summary: ORDER KENT J. DAWSON, District Judge. Before the Court is Plaintiff Netbank's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (#226). No opposition has been filed. Plaintiff requests $7,058,504.93 in fees and $948,620.75 in costs. Plaintiff has prevailed in this action and contends that the Sales and Servicing Agreements entered into by the parties authorizes an award of fees and costs. Plaintiff also submits affidavits to support the amount requested. The Motion appears to be supported by good cause. ..
More
ORDER
KENT J. DAWSON, District Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiff Netbank's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (#226). No opposition has been filed.
Plaintiff requests $7,058,504.93 in fees and $948,620.75 in costs. Plaintiff has prevailed in this action and contends that the Sales and Servicing Agreements entered into by the parties authorizes an award of fees and costs. Plaintiff also submits affidavits to support the amount requested. The Motion appears to be supported by good cause.
Defendants' opposition, if any, to this Motion was due on February 25, 2012. Local Rule 7-2 provides that failure to oppose a motion constitutes consent to the granting of the motion.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Netbank's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (#226) is GRANTED.
Source: Leagle
