George Powell v. Carey International, Inc.
Opinion
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
APRIL 21, 2009 No. 08-11523 THOMAS K. KAHN
________________________ CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 05-21395-CV-PAS
GEORGE POWELL, VILIAM KRALOVIC, ANOUSHEH SARFARAZ, MARK DONAHAY, ERROL ROBINSON, CARLOS BETANCOURT, ALPHONSO MCINTYRE, LUIS LOIZARO, MIOMIR MAUSIMCEV, ED MAZZEO,
Plaintiffs-Appellants Cross-Appellees,
FRANCISCO RENGIFO, OSCAR R. PEREZ, JOHN JOSEPH HUMPHREYS, WILHELM BRAGA PEREIRA, JUAN C. ALBA,
Plaintiffs- Counter-Defendants- Appellants Cross-Appellees,
ALVIN J. HARVARD, et al.,
Plaintiffs, GLASSER, BORETH & KLEPPIN,
Interested-Party- Appellant Cross-Appellee, versus
CAREY INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation qualified to do business in the State of Florida, CAREY LIMOUSINE FLORIDA, INC., a Delaware corporation qualified to do business in Florida,
Defendants- Counter-Claimants- Appellees Cross-Appellants,
VINCE WOLFINGTON, et al.,
Defendants. ________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(April 21, 2009)
Before CARNES, HULL and COX, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The appeal by the plaintiffs in this case raises a number of issues involving the district court’s order awarding attorney’s fees, and the cross-appeal questions the district court’s order denying defendant’s motion for sanctions. The standard of review applicable to all of the issues is abuse of discretion, and the discretion afforded the district court in these matters is considerable. We have read the briefs and the pertinent parts of the record, engaged counsel concerning the issues at oral argument, discussed the matters at some length among ourselves, and thoroughly considered all of the arguments. Having done so, we are convinced that the district court did not abuse its discretion in any of the actions that were raised in the appeal or cross-appeal.
AFFIRMED.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.