Provensal v. Gaspard et al
| Matthew Earle Provensal |
| Michael John Gaspard and H20 Hair, Inc. |
| 2:2010cv04276 |
| November 9, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
| New Orleans Office |
| Orleans |
| Carl Barbier |
| Sally Shushan |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 |
| Plaintiff |
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
109
ORDER AND REASONS. It is ORDERED that Gaspard's 78 Motion for Attorney Fees is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, and that Gaspard is awarded attorney's fees of $18,030.00. It is FURTHER ORDERED that H2O's 99 Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, and that H2O is awarded attorney's fees of $25,805.00 and costs of $3,990.74. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sally Shushan. (gec, )
|
|
Filing
94
ORDER & REASONS denying 74 Motion for Reconsideration. FURTHER ORDERED that the remaining portion of H2Os motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and that plaintiffs remaining claims against H2O under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 23:302 & 51:2231 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as barred by the Faragher/Ellerth defense. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sally Shushan on 3/23/2012. (caa, )
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Gaspard's 3 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part H2O's 4 Motion to Dismiss as set forth in document. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sally Shushan. (ecm, )
|
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 Louisiana Eastern 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.
