George v. Eichen

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit November 22, 2002

George v. Eichen, 51 F. App'x 259 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion of the Court

ORDER **

For the reasons it stated, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying attorney’s fees to objector’s counsel. See Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp., 290 F.3d 1043, 1051-52 (9th Cir. 2002), petition for cert filed, 71 U.S.L.W. 3154 (U.S. Aug. 13, 2002) (No. 02-252). The judgment is AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Reference

Full Case Name: Wilfred GEORGE, Class Member, Objector, Plaintiff—Appellant, Robert Powers Peter J. Franklin Sea Breeze Printing, Inc. Garvin D. Stanislawski Starlog Group, Inc. and Starlog Group, Inc. Defined Pension Plan, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated Howard Sobel Richard Strausz Richard W. Halsey, Plaintiffs—Appellees v. Paul EICHEN
Status: Published