Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Cox v. District of Columbia, 17-cv-1532 (TSC). (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Columbia Number: infdco20180627980 Visitors: 20
Filed: Jun. 26, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 26, 2018
Summary: ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT TANYA S. CHUTKAN , District Judge . The Plaintiffs in this action under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq., have filed a Motion for Attorneys' Fees. ECF No. 7. On April 30, 2018, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation on the motion and allowed the parties fourteen days in which to file objections. ECF No. 16. The parties subsequently obtained an extension of the objections deadline, with Plaintiffs' obje
More

ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT

The Plaintiffs in this action under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq., have filed a Motion for Attorneys' Fees. ECF No. 7. On April 30, 2018, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation on the motion and allowed the parties fourteen days in which to file objections. ECF No. 16. The parties subsequently obtained an extension of the objections deadline, with Plaintiffs' objections due June 20, 2018 and Defendant's response due July 20, 2018. ECF No. 17; May 18, 2018 Min. Order. On June 18, 2018, Plaintiffs notified the court that they have no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 18.

After careful consideration of the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, as well as the parties' failure to object,1 the court hereby ADOPTS the report of the Magistrate Judge. Plaintiffs are hereby awarded fees and costs in the amount of $73,518.43, consistent with the chart found on page twenty-five of the Magistrate Judge's report. ECF No. 16 at p. 25.

Defendant shall make this payment to Plaintiffs no later than August 1, 2018.

FootNotes


1. The court interprets the parties' jointly proposed briefing schedule, which provided for Plaintiffs to file an objection, but not the Defendant, as an indication that Defendant had no objection to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer