Summary
authorizing in the Richmond division of the Court the following hourly rates for attorneys specializing in employment law: $470 for lead counsel with more than thirty years of experience, $360 for attorney with more than ten years of experience, $295 for a "highly efficient" fifth-year associate, $265 for a third-year associate, and $180 for a paralegal with more than ten years of experience in federal litigation
Summary of this case from Crump v. U.S. Dept of NavyOpinion
No. 12-1594
10-01-2012
RALPH STEWART, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. VCU HEALTH SYSTEM AUTHORITY, formerly "VCU/VCU Health System", Defendant - Appellee, and VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY; VCU/VCU HEALTH SYSTEM; VCU MEDICAL CENTER/MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA FOUNDATION; MCV/MCV PHYSICIANS; MCV HOSPITALS AUTHORITY; JOHN DUVAL; MARIA CURRAN; DONNA STEIGLEDER; MARIE GREENWOOD; SHARON JAHN; DEBORAH SLAYDEN; PETER RING; DUANE JACKSON; TERI KUTTENKULER; DAVID HOULETTE; ANTOINETTE LIGHT, Defendants.
Ralph Stewart, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Clayton Fleming, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Lynn Forgrieve Jacob, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia; Sara Berg Rafal, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:09-cv-00738-HEH-DJN) Before KING, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ralph Stewart, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Clayton Fleming, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Lynn Forgrieve Jacob, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia; Sara Berg Rafal, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Ralph Stewart, Jr., appeals the district court's order granting the Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Authority's petition for attorney's fees and ordering that he pay attorney's fees in the amount of $28,547.25 as a sanction for his failure to comply with the rules of discovery. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Stewart's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, Stewart has forfeited appellate review of the court's order. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED