Cage v. McHugh

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cage v. McHugh. Read the opinion of the Court — 963 F. Supp. 2d 29
District Court, District of Columbia·Decided August 28, 2013·No. Civil Action No. 2012-0444·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MAlA FALCONI-SACHS ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Case No. 12-1356 (RJL) ) LPF SENATE SQUARE, LLC, et. al. ) ) ) Defendant, ) )

o1::a- (August?:}__, 2013) [Dkt. #21]

For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion entered thisJtf;;,y of August 2013, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Attorney's Fees in Accordance with 28

U.S.C. §1446(c) [Dkt. #21] is GRANTED; it is further

ORDERED that the determination of what amount should be awarded shall be

referred to Magistrate John M. Facciola pursuant to Local Rule 72.2.

SO ORDERED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cage v. McHugh, (D.D.C. 2013).

Cage v. McHugh (Cage v. McHugh) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related