WALLS v. CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT AUTHORITY, C 08-0224 PJH. (2012)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20120709522
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jul. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 06, 2012
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES; VACATING HEARING PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge. The court has reviewed de novo Magistrate Judge Corley's Report and Recommendation Re: plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees, as well as the briefing on defendant's motion for de novo review of the Report, and the briefing on plaintiff's original motion for fees. Upon review of the entire record in this case, the court finds the Report correct,
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES; VACATING HEARING PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge. The court has reviewed de novo Magistrate Judge Corley's Report and Recommendation Re: plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees, as well as the briefing on defendant's motion for de novo review of the Report, and the briefing on plaintiff's original motion for fees. Upon review of the entire record in this case, the court finds the Report correct, ..
More
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES; VACATING HEARING
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge.
The court has reviewed de novo Magistrate Judge Corley's Report and Recommendation Re: plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees, as well as the briefing on defendant's motion for de novo review of the Report, and the briefing on plaintiff's original motion for fees. Upon review of the entire record in this case, the court finds the Report correct, well-reasoned and thorough, and ADOPTS it in every respect, including the findings therein, which the court adopts as its own. Accordingly, the motion for attorneys fees is GRANTED and defendant shall pay the fees in the reduced amount as recommended by Judge Corley of $88,734.52.
As the court finds that a hearing is not necessary nor would it be helpful given the court's familiarity with this case, the July 11, 2012 hearing date is VACATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
