Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Michael L. Potts, D.D.S., and the Dad American Academy of Implant Dentistry v. Brian Stiger

April 26, 2011

MICHAEL L. POTTS, D.D.S., AND THE DAD AMERICAN ACADEMY OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
BRIAN STIGER, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: John A. Mendez U. S. District Judge

FRANK R. RECKER, ESQ (Pro Hac Vice) recker@ddslaw.com FRANK R. RECKER & ASSOCIATES, CO., L.P.A. 1850 San Marco Road, Suite A Marco Island, FL 34145-3014 Phone: 239.642.4704 ANN TAYLOR SCHWING, ESQ. (#91914) BEST BEST KRIEGER LLP 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1650 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916.551.2098 MENNEMEIER, GLASSMAN & STROUD LLP KENNETH C. MENNEMEIER (SBN 113973) 980 9th Street, Suite 1700 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 553-4000 E-Mail: kcm@mgslaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General of the State of California ARTHUR D. TAGGART Lead Supervising Deputy Attorney General JEFFREY M. PHILLIPS, State Bar No. 154990 Deputy Attorney General California Department of Justice 1300 I Street, Suite 125 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 324-6292 jeffrey.phillips@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendants

STIPULATION AFFIXING AMOUNT OF COSTS AND FEES;

ORDER ON STIPULATION

The parties stipulate as follows:

RECITALS

A. On October 15, 2010, after three days of trial and the close of Defendants' case, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(c) and ruled in Plaintiffs' favor on each of Plaintiffs' three claims.

B. On November 18, 2010, the Court entered final judgment (Doc. #235),

(1) declaring Section 651(h)(5)(A) unconstitutional both on its face and as applied to Plaintiffs,

(2) enjoining "Defendants, and all persons under the control or supervision of Defendants, from implementing, applying, or otherwise enforcing the provisions of Section 651(h)(5)(A)," and

(3) providing that the matter of attorney's fees will be handled by motion in accordance with Local Rule 293.

C. On December 2, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a "Bill of Costs" (Doc. #238), seeking $13,248.66 in costs, which amount was comprised of $9,012.90 in costs previously awarded by the Court (Doc. #123) as well as $4,235.76 in costs incurred since the Court's June 20, 2005 order awarding costs. Defendants did not oppose Plaintiffs' "Bill of Costs."

D. On January 5, 2011, Plaintiffs moved for $1,072,047 in attorney's fees and litigation expenses (Doc. #242), which amount was comprised of $315,240.01 in fees and expenses previously awarded by the Court (Doc. #123) as well as $756,806.99 in fees and expenses incurred since the Court's June 20, 2005 order awarding those fees and expenses.

E. On February 9, 2011, Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiffs' attorney's fee motion (Doc. #250), arguing that plaintiffs' fee request should be reduced by approximately $112,000.

F. On February 16, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a reply brief in support of their attorney's fees motion (Doc. #253), in which Plaintiffs claimed an additional $7,105 in fees (fees incurred since January 5, 2011), bringing the total amount of the requested fees and expenses ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.