525 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 135 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
973 F.2d 96·
2d Cir.·
1992-08-18
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in calculating the lodestar amount for attorneys' fees, nor in refusing to adjust the award downward for limited success, as the settlement provided significant benefits and established important precedent.
-
972 F.2d 1113·
9th Cir.·
1992-08-18
The dissenting judge argues that the state must cover allogeneic bone marrow transplants for similarly situated individuals, as the statutory language and practical considerations support equal treatment.
-
972 F.2d 712·
6th Cir.·
1992-08-18
The court held that prison officials are entitled to qualified immunity for actions taken under a regulation later found unconstitutionally vague as applied, and that enhancement of attorney fees for contingency is not permitted under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
-
972 F.2d 920·
8th Cir.·
1992-08-13
The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the magistrate judge did not err in granting summary judgment to supervisors, admitting impeachment testimony, or awarding attorney's fees, and that the nominal damages award was not a plain injustice.
-
970 F.2d 397·
7th Cir.·
1992-08-12
The court held that the district court's award of attorney's fees was not adequately supported by the record and that the timeliness of the petition was not definitively established. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
-
965 F.2d 682·
9th Cir.·
1992-05-19
The court held that the class of Roman Catholic inmates qualified as prevailing parties under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, entitling them to attorney's fees.
-
959 F.2d 584·
5th Cir.·
1992-04-30
The court held that the claim for monetary damages was not moot and should be remanded, but the claim for injunctive relief was not justiciable due to a lack of a present or future threat of harm.
-
956 F.2d 958·
10th Cir.·
1992-02-11
The court held that the district court properly denied the appellants' motion for attorneys' fees and costs because it was untimely filed under the local rule.
-
956 F.2d 1·
1st Cir.·
1992-01-31
The court held that the district court erred in summarily dismissing the claim for injunctive relief and the issue of attorney's fees without proper consideration of mootness and prevailing party status.
-
931 F.2d 11·
5th Cir.·
1991-05-13
The court held that there is no constitutional right requiring a government employer to pay wages for days an employee misses work to respond to a federal court subpoena, and thus no basis for a § 1983 claim or § 1988 attorney fees.
-
931 F.2d 524·
9th Cir.·
1991-05-02
The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because there was a genuine dispute of material fact regarding probable cause for the warrantless entry. The award of attorneys' fees was reversed as there was no prevailing party.
-
921 F.2d 604·
5th Cir.·
1991-01-22
The court affirmed the district court's denial of interdistrict relief because the state's actions did not cause a significant interdistrict segregative effect, and affirmed the denial of attorney fees to the NAACP because it was a prevailing defendant whose claim was not frivolo
-
915 F.2d 164·
5th Cir.·
1990-10-25
The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction, and therefore, the case should be remanded to determine if plaintiffs are entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
-
910 F.2d 296·
5th Cir.·
1990-09-06
The court held that the magistrate misapplied the standard for awarding attorney's fees to prevailing defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and erred in denying reconsideration of Rule 11 sanctions against an attorney.
-
901 F.2d 1508·
10th Cir.·
1990-04-23
A plaintiff who obtains a preliminary injunction that grants the relief sought, even if the case later becomes moot on appeal, is a prevailing party for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, unless special circumstances render an award unjust.
-
901 F.2d 438·
5th Cir.·
1990-04-16
The award of attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 must be vacated and remanded because one plaintiff did not prevail on any federal claim, requiring apportionment of fees.
-
898 F.2d 1192·
6th Cir.·
1990-03-26
The court held that the election of political party officers, absent evidence of integral involvement in governmental functions, does not constitute state action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for the purpose of awarding attorneys' fees.
-
898 F.2d 357·
3d Cir.·
1990-03-12
The court held that attorneys' fees are to be awarded based on the degree of success achieved, disallowing fees for distinct and unsuccessful claims while allowing them for related unsuccessful claims that contribute to the overall relief obtained.
-
891 F.2d 190·
8th Cir.·
1990-01-08
-
The court held that the tribes' success in establishing rights to hatchery-raised fish was based on treaty interpretation, not civil rights claims, thus precluding attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
-
The district court erred in awarding attorney's fees after the parties had expressly waived them in a settlement agreement approved by the court, as such waivers are permissible under Evans v. Jeff D. and the waiver here was not obtained through bad faith or duress.
-
861 F.2d 1163·
9th Cir.·
1988-11-22
The court held that Title VII does not preempt § 1983 claims for constitutional violations and that a protected property interest can arise from mutual understandings. The court also found the district court erred in reinstating the full damages award after a remittitur.
-
829 F.2d 1334·
4th Cir.·
1987-10-02
A plaintiff may be considered a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 even without a formal judgment if their lawsuit causes the defendant to remedy the constitutional deficiencies.
-
814 F.2d 410·
7th Cir.·
1987-03-11
The court held that while Rule 23(b)(2) defendant class actions are not absolutely prohibited, they should be reserved for rare circumstances and are not appropriate in this case due to unmanageability and unfocused remedies.
-
808 F.2d 1114·
5th Cir.·
1987-02-02
The court held that attorneys' fees awarded under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for work performed by a legal services attorney while employed by the organization belong to the organization, not the individual attorney, even if the attorney represented clients not eligible for the organizatio
-
The court held that the state agency's actions in terminating Medicaid benefits based on an improper interpretation of federal law were taken under color of state law, making the state liable for attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
-
797 F.2d 224·
5th Cir.·
1986-08-18
The court held that the plaintiff's federal claims were frivolous and that sanctions, including double costs and attorney fees, were warranted due to the baseless nature of the litigation.
-
488 So. 2d 888·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1986-05-16
McIntyre appealed the denial of attorney's fees after accepting a settlement offer that explicitly included reasonable attorney's fees. The court reversed, holding that when a Rule 1.442 offer of judgment clearly includes attorney's fees, the trial court must award them and canno
-
775 F.2d 1096·
10th Cir.·
1985-09-30
The court affirmed the award of attorneys' fees and costs to the prevailing plaintiffs in a § 1983 action, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's determination of prevailing party status, reasonable hours, rates, and enhancement for exceptional success. The court dis
-
749 F.2d 7·
6th Cir.·
1984-11-27
The court held that an appellate court can recall its mandate to allow a district court to determine attorney's fees, even if costs were previously denied, to avoid procedural obstacles and ensure a fair determination.
-
The court held that a trial court's denial of attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 based on the plaintiff's obnoxious behavior constituted an abuse of discretion, as such behavior does not rise to the level of special circumstances required to deny fees.
-
729 F.2d 691·
10th Cir.·
1984-03-12
The court held that 42 U.S.C. § 1988 does not authorize attorney's fees for prevailing in state administrative proceedings.
-
714 F.2d 856·
8th Cir.·
1983-08-19
The court held that a party is not entitled to attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 if the preliminary injunction they obtained was erroneously granted and thus unnecessary.
-
695 F.2d 352·
9th Cir.·
1982-12-21
The court held that the settlement agreement dismissed the Dental Board defendants in both individual and official capacities, and that attorneys' fees could be awarded against the Appellants because they obtained relief through procedural reforms, but the award must be recalcula
-
682 F.2d 282·
1st Cir.·
1982-07-07
The court held that attorney's fees awarded under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 can include time spent on discovery against defendants who were later dismissed, if that discovery was reasonably necessary to the preparation of the case against the remaining defendants.
-
650 F.2d 529·
4th Cir.·
1981-06-05
The court held that plaintiffs were prevailing parties entitled to attorneys' fees and costs, and that the district court erred in limiting the scope of injunctive relief.
-
643 F.2d 1219·
5th Cir.·
1981-05-01
The court held that an agricultural cooperative's use of the 'market not to exceed net realizable value' method for inventory valuation was permissible under 26 U.S.C. § 471 when supported by objective evidence of reduced market value, and that such valuation did not violate the
-
604 F.2d 840·
4th Cir.·
1979-08-15
The court held that the district court improperly dismissed the case as moot because the Supreme Court's decision in Bates did not resolve the issue of self-laudatory advertising claims by lawyers.
-
The court held that Oregon's policy denying foster care eligibility to children placed with related foster parents conflicts with the Social Security Act and that the award of attorney fees was permissible under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
-
The court held that accruals to the SUB Plan that did not exceed maximum financing limitations were deductible in the year of accrual under the 'all events' test, but the deductibility of amounts exceeding limitations and potentially spilling over to S&V Plans required further fa