KOSTIC v. Texas A&M University-Commerce et al
| NENAD KOSTIC |
| Texas A&M University-Commerce, TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, DAN JONES, LARRY F LEMANSKI, CHRISTINE EVANS and BEN W.-L. JANG |
| 3:2010cv02265 |
| November 8, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Dallas Office |
| Dallas |
| Barbara M.G. Lynn |
| Other Labor Litigation |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 451 |
| 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
282
ORDER Accepting Findings and Recommendations re 281 Findings and Recommendations on Case; granting in part and denying in part 264 Motion for Attorney Fees. The Court awards Plaintiff Nenad M. Kosti $433,745.00 in reasonable attorneys fees under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k) and $62,551.93 in costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, plus postjudgment interest on this award of fees and costs from August 13, 2015, the date on which the Judgment was entered. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 2/3/2016) (mem)
|
|
Filing
259
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 246 Motion for Judgment. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 8/13/2015) (skt)
|
|
Filing
162
Order Accepting 151 Findings and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 3/31/2014) (jrr)
|
|
Filing
143
ORDER ACCEPTING 138 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 7/3/2013) (skt)
|
|
Filing
105
ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 100 Findings and Recommendations on Motion re: 61 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Christine Evans, Texas A&M Un iversity-Commerce, Texas A&M University System, Michael D. McKinney, Larry F Lemanski, Dan R Jones, Ben W.-L. Jang, 56 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court finds that, except with respect to Plaintiff's retaliation and defamation claim s, the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Court as to all claims but retaliation and defamation as to Defendant Jang only. Becaus e the Court concludes that there is a fact question as to whether or not the Plaintiff was terminated in retaliation for protected conduct, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on that ground is DENIED. The Court also DENIES summary judgment on Plaintiff's defamation claim, now asserted only against Jang. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 3/31/2013) (tla)
|
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 Texas 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
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.
