Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

10-2265 - Kostic v. Texas A&M University-Commerce et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
10-2265 - Kostic v. Texas A&M University-Commerce et al
February 1, 2013
PDF | More
Findings and Recommendations on Motion re: 61 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Christine Evans, Texas A&M University-Commerce, Texas A&M University System, Michael D. McKinney, Larry F Lemanski, Dan R Jones, Ben W.-L. Jang, 56 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Nenad M Kostic. Defendant's 61 MOTION for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED, Plaintiff's 56 MOTION for Summary Judgment Partial should be DENIED, and judgment should be entered in Dft's favor on all of Pla's claims. (See order for specifics) (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L Horan on 2/1/2013) (mcrd)
March 31, 2013
PDF | More
ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 100 Findings and Recommendations on Motion re: 61 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Christine Evans, Texas A&M University-Commerce, Texas A&M University System, Michael D. McKinney, Larry F Lemanski, Dan R Jones, Ben W.-L. Jang, 56 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court finds that, except with respect to Plaintiff's retaliation and defamation claims, the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Court as to all claims but retaliation and defamation as to Defendant Jang only. Because the Court concludes that there is a fact question as to whether or not the Plaintiff was terminated in retaliation for protected conduct, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on that ground is DENIED. The Court also DENIES summary judgment on Plaintiff's defamation claim, now asserted only against Jang. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 3/31/2013) (tla)
June 12, 2013
PDF | More
Findings and Recommendations on Motion. The undersigned recommends that Plaintiff's request for an adverse inference based on alleged spoliation should be denied. (See order for specifics) (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L Horan on 6/12/2013) (mcrd)
July 3, 2013
PDF | More
ORDER ACCEPTING 138 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 7/3/2013) (skt)
January 17, 2014
PDF | More
Findings and Recommendations on Motions: Defendant's 108 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Renewed) with Brief should be granted in part and denied in part. Defendant's 129 MOTION to Strike New Allegations and Evidence in Plaintiff's Response to the Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment should be denied. (See order for specifics) (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L Horan on 1/17/2014) (mcrd)
March 31, 2014
PDF | More
Order Accepting 151 Findings and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 3/31/2014) (jrr)
August 13, 2015
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 246 Motion for Judgment. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 8/13/2015) (skt)
December 28, 2015
PDF | More
Findings and Recommendations on Motion: The Court should grant in part and deny in part Plaintiff's 264 MOTION for Attorney Fees and award Plaintiff Nenad M. Kosti $433,745.00 in reasonable attorneys' fees under 42 USC 2000e-5(k) and $62,551.93 in costs under 28 USC 1920, plus postjudgment interest on this award of fees and costs from August 13, 2015, the date on which the Judgment was entered. (See order for specifics) (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L Horan on 12/28/2015) (mcrd) Modified text on 12/28/2015 (ykp).
February 3, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER Accepting Findings and Recommendations 281 and granting in part and denying in part 264 Motion for Attorney Fees. The Court awards Plaintiff Nenad M. Kosti $433,745.00 in reasonable attorneys fees under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k) and $62,551.93 in costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, plus postjudgment interest on this award of fees and costs from August 13, 2015, the date on which the Judgment was entered. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 2/3/2016) (mem)