Hammett
Hammett v. Sherman
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LAURA LYNN HAMMETT, Case No.: 19cv605-LL-AHG
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
v. RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER
AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES
MARY E. SHERMAN, et al.
AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
Defendants. REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
16 [ECF Nos. 177, 193] 17 18 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Laura Lynn Hammett’s Motion to Vacate Void Orders Granting Attorneys’ Fees. ECF No. 177. The Motion requests that the Court vacate or reconsider its March 23, 2020 order [ECF No. 111] granting the motions for attorneys’ fees of (a) Defendants Patrick C. McGarrigle and McGarrigle, Kenney & Zampiello, APC (the “MKZ Defendants”) [ECF No. 49] and (b) Defendants Ellis Stern, Alan N. Goldberg, and Stern & Goldberg Attorneys (the “S&G Defendants”) [ECF No. 54] (jointly, the “Attorney Defendants”). The Court finds this matter suitable for determination on the papers and without oral argument…