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 MOTIONS FOR
v. ATTORNEYS’ FEES
MARY E. SHERMAN, et al. [ECF Nos. 270, 271] Defendants. 16 This matter is before the Court on the Motions for Attorneys’ Fees filed by Defendants Patrick C. McGarrigle and McGarrigle, Kenney & Zampiello (together, the “MKZ Defendants”) (the “MKZ Fee Motion”) [ECF No. 270], and by Defendants Ellis Roy Stern, Alan N. Goldberg, Stern and Goldberg (together, the “S&G Defendants”) (the “S&G Fee Motion”) [ECF No. 271] (collectively, the “Attorney Defendants” and the “Fee Motions”). Plaintiff Laura Lynn Hammett filed an opposition to the MKZ Fee Motion [ECF No. 285], an opposition to the S&G Fee Motion [ECF No. 286], and both the MKZ Defendants [ECF No. 288] and S&G Defendants [ECF No. 287] filed replies to Plaintiff’s oppositions. The Court finds this matter suitable for determination on the…