Aguilar v. The Fence Guy, Inc. et al
| Jose Aguilar |
| John Hausle, The Fence Guy of Long Island, LLC and The Fence Guy, Inc. |
| 2:2017cv07412 |
| December 20, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Central Islip Office |
| Anne Y. Shields |
| Arthur D. Spatt |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation |
| None |
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
32
ADOPTION ORDER granting 24 Motion for Attorney Fees; granting 30 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Court awards the Plaintiffs the amount recommended in the R&R. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. SEE ATTACHED ADOPTION ORDER for details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 3/5/2020. (Coleman, Laurie)
|
|
Filing
25
ADOPTION ORDER: More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since service of the R&R on the Defendants, who have failed to file an objection. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court has reviewed the R&R fo r clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its result. Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety, and the Plaintiff's motion for a default judgment is granted. SEE ATTACHED ORDER for details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 6/10/2019. (Coleman, Laurie)
|
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 New York 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.
