From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MidFirst Bank v. Huff

United States District Court, E.D. Texas
Oct 3, 2024
6:23-cv-00443 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2024)

Opinion

6:23-cv-00443

10-03-2024

MidFirst Bank, Plaintiff, v. Jerry Olin Huff, Defendant.


ORDER

J. CAMPBELL BARKER, United States District Judge

On July 5, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion for attorneys' fees and costs. Doc. 11. The motion was referred to Magistrate Judge John D. Love for findings of fact and recommendation for disposition. Doc. 12. The magistrate judge issued an initial report recommending that the motion be denied without prejudice to refiling. Doc. 13. Thereafter, on July 31, 2024, plaintiff filed an amended motion for attorney's fees and costs. Doc. 14. The magistrate judge then issued a supplemental report recommending that plaintiff's motion be granted in part and denied in part and that plaintiff receive the sum of $2,310.00 in attorneys' fees and $402.00 in costs. Doc. 15.

Neither party has filed objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, and the timeframe for doing so has passed. The court therefore reviews the report only for clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge's supplemental report, and being satisfied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 14) is granted in part and denied in part, and plaintiff is awarded the sum of $2,310.00 in attorneys' fees and $402.00 in costs. Plaintiff's original motion for attorneys' fees (Doc. 11) is denied as moot.

So ordered.


Summaries of

MidFirst Bank v. Huff

United States District Court, E.D. Texas
Oct 3, 2024
6:23-cv-00443 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2024)
Case details for

MidFirst Bank v. Huff

Case Details

Full title:MidFirst Bank, Plaintiff, v. Jerry Olin Huff, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Texas

Date published: Oct 3, 2024

Citations

6:23-cv-00443 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2024)