Chicago United Industries, Ltd. et al v. City Of Chicago et al
| 1:2005cv05011 |
| August 30, 2005 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Matthew F. Kennelly |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1985 Civil Rights |
| Defendant |
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
359
WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr on 9/20/2011: Before the Court is Defendants bill of costs 341 seeking $60,356.82 in costs associated with copying, court reporting and transcripts, subpoena fees, and expert witness f ees. For the reasons stated below, the Court awards $35,731.82 in costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and $12,800.00 in expert witness fees under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4)(C) for a total award of $48,531.82. Notices Mailed by Judge's Staff (tbk, )
|
|
Filing
340
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr on 9/10/2010. Mailed notice(tbk, )
|
|
Filing
318
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr on 1/15/2010. Mailed notice(tbk, )
|
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 Illinois Northern 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
| Search for this case: Chicago United Industries, Ltd. et al v. City Of Chicago et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
