GARDNER v. MARTIN

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 05-CV-769-HU.

Attorney(S)

LINDA L. MARSHALL, Lake Oswego, OR, Attorney for Plaintiffs. CHARLES F. HINKLE, BRAD S. DANIELS, Portland, OR, Attorneys for Defendants Tom Martino Westwood, One, Inc. DUANE A. BOSWORTH, KEVIN H. KONO, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Portland, OR, Attorneys for Defendant Clear Channel, Communications, Inc.

Judges

Anna J. Brown

Acts

Judiciary And Judicial Procedure — United States Magistrate Judges — Court Officers And Employees — Jurisdiction, Powers, And Temporary Assignment

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

JOHN M. GARDNER and SUSAN L. GARDNER, husband and wife, and MT. HOOD POLARIS, INC., an Oregon Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. TOM MARTIN, dba THE TOM MARTINO SHOW; WESTWOOD ONE, INC., a Delaware corporation; and CLEAR CHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Texas corporation, Defendants.

ORDER

ANNA BROWN, District JudgePage 2

Magistrate Judge Dennis James Hubel issued Findings and Recommendation (#88) on June 15, 2006, in which he recommended the Court grant in part and deny in part Defendants' Motions for Attorney's Fees (#49, #54) and Supplemental Motions for Attorney's Fees (#77, #80). Defendants Martino and Westwood One, Inc., filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). This Court has carefully considered the Objections of Defendants Martino and West One and concludes Defendants' Objections do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. The Court also has reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and does not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Hubel's Findings and Recommendation (#88) and, therefore, GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motions for Attorney Fees (#49, #54) and Supplemental Motions for Attorney Fees (#77, #80). Accordingly, the Court awards Defendants Martino and Westwood a total of $20,982.50 in attorneys' fees and awards Defendant Clear Channel a total of $6,517.50 in attorneys' fees.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

JOHN M. GARDNER and SUSAN L. GARDNER, husband and wife, and MT. HOOD POLARIS, INC., an Oregon Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. TOM MARTIN, dba THE TOM MARTINO SHOW; WESTWOOD ONE, INC., a Delaware corporation; and CLEAR CHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Texas corporation, Defendants.

Comments