Salvador Navarro. DHL Global Forwarding et al
| Salvador Navarro |
| DHL Global Forwarding and Does |
| 2:2015cv05510 |
| July 21, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Charles F. Eick |
| Christina A. Snyder |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
140
FINAL JUDGMENT 139 by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Judgment is hereby entered against DHL in the amount of $1,960,000.00 inclusive of all attorneys fees, costs, and expenses awarded in the Action.. Unless otherwise stated in this Final Judgment, Navarro and DHL shall each bear his or its own attorneys fees, costs, and expenses incurred in the Action. The supersedeas bond posted by DHL on June 4, 2018 in the amount of $2,692,306.89 shall automatically be released upon receipt of notice o f entry of dismissal of Appeal No. 17-56662 currently pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. DHL shall pay the amount of this Judgment within 30 days of entry of this Judgment, with interest at the rate of 1.95% per annum pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) from the date of the entry of this Judgment until paid. Navarro and DHL have stipulated that each waives any right to appeal from this Final Judgment. (lc)
|
|
Filing
133
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT PENDING APPEAL 126 . By separate order, the Court awards plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees in the amount of $616,687.50. In addition, pla intiff has filed an application to the Clerk of Court to tax costs in the amount of $7,158.01. Dkt. 123. The Court will therefore increase the proposed bond by $779,806.89, which is 125 percent of the combined attorneys fees award and taxab le costs claimed by plaintiff. Accordingly, defendants motion for stay of execution of judgment pending appeal is GRANTED. The Court approves the supersedeas bond in the amount of $2,692,306.89. Within fourteen (14) days of this Order, defendant shall post a supersedeas bond in that amount in compliance with this Courts Local Rules. UPON POSTING OF THE SUPERSEDEAS BOND with the Clerk of Court, ALL proceedings to enforce this Courts March 13, 2018 judgment shall be STAYED UNTIL RESOLUTION OF PENDING APPEAL. (lc). Modified on 5/22/2018. (lc).
|
|
Filing
104
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PREJUDGMENT INTEREST 96 by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Accordingly, the Court DENIES plaintiff's motion for prejudgment interest on the jury award for past lost wages. Plaintiff is hereby directed to submit a proposedjudgment. IT IS SO ORDERED. (lom)
|
|
Filing
95
MINUTES [IN CHAMBERS] DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW, AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE, A NEW TRIAL 91 by before Judge Christina A. Snyder. Accordingly, the Court DENIES defendants motion for a new trial. In accordance with the foregoing, the Court DENIES defendants motion for judgment as a matter of law and, in the alternative, a new trial. IT IS SO ORDERED. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS) Court Reporter: Not Present. (ab)
|
|
Filing
43
MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held before Judge Christina A. Snyder RE: Defendant DHL Global Forwarding's Motion for Summary Judgment 38 . DHL's motion for summary judgment is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. The motion is DENIED with respect to plaintiff's second, third, fifth, sixth, seventh, and ninth claims. The motion is GRANTED with respect to plaintiffs first, fourth, eighth, and tenth claims. Court Reporter: Laura Elias. (gk)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
