Moore v. Menasha Corp.

Sixth Circuit

Moore v. Menasha Corp.

476 F. App'x 77

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedAugust 22, 2012

DocketNos. 11-1422, 11-1423

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 476 F. App'x 77 (Moore v. Menasha Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Moore v. Menasha Corp., 476 F. App'x 77 (6th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this companion case to Case Nos. 10-2171; 10-2173, the parties cross-appeal a decision by the district court awarding attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $125,000 to Plaintiffs and $45,000 to Defen[78]*78dant in relation to Plaintiffs’ action alleging that Defendant violated Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. § 185, and Section 502(a)(1)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132. See Moore v. Menasha Corp., No. l:08-cv-1167, 2011 WL 811150, at *1 (W.D.Mich. March 1, 2011).

In light of our opinion reversing the district court’s judgment in Nos. 10-2171 and 10-2173, we also hereby VACATE the district court’s determination of fees and costs in Nos. 11-1422 and 11-1423 and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with our disposition of Nos. 10-2171 and 10-2173.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this companion case to Case Nos. 10-2171; 10-2173, the parties cross-appeal a decision by the district court awarding attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $125,000 to Plaintiffs and $45,000 to Defen[78]*78dant in relation to Plaintiffs’ action alleging that Defendant violated Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. § 185, and Section 502(a)(1)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132. See Moore v. Menasha Corp., No. l:08-cv-1167, 2011 WL 811150, at *1 (W.D.Mich. March 1, 2011).

In light of our opinion reversing the district court’s judgment in Nos. 10-2171 and 10-2173, we also hereby VACATE the district court’s determination of fees and costs in Nos. 11-1422 and 11-1423 and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with our disposition of Nos. 10-2171 and 10-2173.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

476 F. App'x 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-menasha-corp-ca6-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack