WASHINGTON v. MED-1 SOLUTIONS, LLC

WASHINGTON v. MED-1 SOLUTIONS, LLC

Plaintiff:	SHAYLA WASHINGTON
Defendant:	MED-1 SOLUTIONS, LLC
Case Number:	1:2017cv00534
Filed:	February 20, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	Denise K. LaRue
Presiding Judge:	Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit:	Consumer Credit
Cause of Action:	15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
March 21, 2018	Filing 23 ENTRY ON PENDING MOTIONS REGARDING ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS - This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Shayla Washington's ("Washington") Motion for Assessment of Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 13 ), and two Su pplemental Motions for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 16 ; Filing No. 19 ). Also before the Court is a Motion to Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees (Filing No. 17 ), filed by Defendant Med-1 Solutions, LLC (" Med-1"). Washington's Motion for Assessment of Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 13 ) is GRANTED in the following modified amount: $505.00 in costs and $5,212.50 in attorney's fees for a total of $5,717.50. Washington's counsel has submitted an up-to-date itemization which includes his Supplemental Motions for Attorney's Fees and Reply. Washington's Supplemental Motions for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 16 ; Filing No. 19 ) and Med-1's Motion to Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees (Filing No. 17 ), are all DENIED as improperly filed. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/21/2018. (BRR)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 21, 2018

Filing 23 ENTRY ON PENDING MOTIONS REGARDING ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS - This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Shayla Washington's ("Washington") Motion for Assessment of Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 13 ), and two Su pplemental Motions for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 16 ; Filing No. 19 ). Also before the Court is a Motion to Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees (Filing No. 17 ), filed by Defendant Med-1 Solutions, LLC (" Med-1"). Washington's Motion for Assessment of Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 13 ) is GRANTED in the following modified amount: $505.00 in costs and $5,212.50 in attorney's fees for a total of $5,717.50. Washington's counsel has submitted an up-to-date itemization which includes his Supplemental Motions for Attorney's Fees and Reply. Washington's Supplemental Motions for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 16 ; Filing No. 19 ) and Med-1's Motion to Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees (Filing No. 17 ), are all DENIED as improperly filed. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/21/2018. (BRR)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: WASHINGTON v. MED-1 SOLUTIONS, LLC
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: MED-1 SOLUTIONS, LLC
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: SHAYLA WASHINGTON
Represented By:	John Thomas Steinkamp
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| 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.

Why Is My Information Online?