From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Santiago v. Meyer Tool Inc.

United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio
Aug 22, 2024
1:19-cv-32 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 22, 2024)

Opinion

1:19-cv-32

08-22-2024

REBECA SANTIAGO, Plaintiff, v. MEYER TOOL INC., et al., Defendants.


KAREN L. LITKOVITZ, MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ORDER ADOPTING SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 154)

MATTHEW W. MCFARLAND, JUDGE

The Court has reviewed the Supplemental Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz (Doc. 154), to whom this case is referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Noting that no objections have been filed and the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) has expired, the Court hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendation in its entirety and ORDERS the following:

1. Plaintiffs motion filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1) to vacate costs (Doc. 146; see also Supporting Documentation, Docs. 150, 153) is GRANTED IN PART allowing a 50% reduction in the costs awarded against her ($2,880.65) and DENIED IN PART as to a total reduction in cost.
2. The parties are encouraged to devise a mutually satisfactory payment plan taking into account Plaintiffs modest means and outstanding tax debts.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Santiago v. Meyer Tool Inc.

United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio
Aug 22, 2024
1:19-cv-32 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 22, 2024)
Case details for

Santiago v. Meyer Tool Inc.

Case Details

Full title:REBECA SANTIAGO, Plaintiff, v. MEYER TOOL INC., et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio

Date published: Aug 22, 2024

Citations

1:19-cv-32 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 22, 2024)

Citing Cases

Eitel v. PNC Bank

While Dr. Miller's report provides some information, it does not complete Plaintiff's burden to make to show…