Free Order - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 24.3 kB
Pages: 2
Date: October 12, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 280 Words, 1,885 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/2677/475.pdf

Download Order - District Court of Connecticut ( 24.3 kB)


Preview Order - District Court of Connecticut
Case 2:89-cv-00859-AHN

Document 475

Filed 10/07/2004

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ---------------------------------------------------------------x JUAN F., et al., : Plaintiffs, : : v. : : M. JODI RELL, et al., : : Defendants. : ---------------------------------------------------------------x

CIVIL NO. H89-859 (AHN)

October 7, 2004

Case 2:89-cv-00859-AHN

Document 475

Filed 10/07/2004

Page 2 of 2

ORDER Plaintiffs have moved for approval of attorneys' fees and expenses in this matter, for the period from October 1, 2003, to March 31, 2004. Plaintiffs' counsel seek $76,415.33 in fees and $2,164.25 in out-of-pocket expenses. Defendants agree to the amount of requested fees and expenses. The Court Monitor has reviewed the application and supporting papers, discussed the matter with the parties' counsel, and has recommended approval and granting of the motion. The Court has reviewed the application and supporting papers, has considered the Court Monitor's recommendation, and hereby ORDERS that Plaintiffs' motion is GRANTED. Within 30 days of the entry of this ORDER, Defendants shall pay a total of $57,256.83 to Children's Rights and $21,322.75 to the Center for Children's Advocacy. The Court further holds that strict application of Rule 23(h) of the Fed. R. Civ. P. does not require approval of notice, publication and a hearing on the request for attorneys' fees and expenses, as it does not apply in a longstanding case such as this where there has been periodic submission and review of requests for fees and expenses concerning post-judgment monitoring and enforcement of a consent decree, and that doing so in the context of this case would be unduly burdensome. SO ORDERED this 7th day of October, 2004 at Bridgeport, Connecticut.

__________________________________ HON. ALAN H. NEVAS United States District Judge