IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 6, 2011
BRENT WINTERS, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
DELORES JORDAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
On June 20, 2011, plaintiffs filed a document called "The Winters' Objections to the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendations Regarding Defendant Logsdon's Attorney's Fees." (Objections, Dkt. No. 294.) Plaintiffs objections concern an order entered by the undersigned, which, in part, granted defendant Valerie Logsdon's motion for attorney's fees and awarded Logsdon $12,925.00 is attorney's fees and $368.70 in costs. (Order, Apr. 21, 2011, Dkt. No. 284.)
As an initial matter, plaintiffs' objections are procedurally defective. The undersigned granted Logsdon's motion for attorney's fees by order, and did not recommend the award through proposed findings and recommendations. Accordingly, the order was effective immediately, and no findings and recommendations were entered to which plaintiffs could object. To the extent that plaintiffs intended to apply for reconsideration of the April 21, 2011 order before the undersigned, see E. Dist. Local Rule 230(j), such application for reconsideration is denied.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that to the extent that the document filed by plaintiffs and entitled "The Winters' Objections to the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendations Regarding Defendant Logsdon's Attorney's Fees" (Dkt. No. 294) is an application for reconsideration of the undersigned's April 21, 2011 order, that application for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.