Special Circumstances Exception

20 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Johnson v. The State OF Miss.
  606 F.2d 635· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-16 ·cited 93×
  The court held that attorney's fees are awardable for time spent litigating the fee claim and for work performed on appeals, but the district court improperly excluded time spent reviewing defendants' fee objection.
• Perez v. Univ. OF Puerto RICO
  600 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1979-06-19 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying attorney's fees to prevailing plaintiffs based on 'special circumstances' when only nominal damages were awarded.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. United Aircraft Corp.
  324 F.2d 128· 2d Cir.· 1963-11-06 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board correctly found the employer violated the NLRA by prohibiting employees from distributing union literature on their own time in nonworking areas, as the employer failed to show special circumstances justifying the rule.
• Coors Container Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  628 F.2d 1283· 10th Cir.· 1980-08-27 ·cited 19×
  The court held that Coors Container Company violated the National Labor Relations Act by prohibiting the display of a boycott sign, disciplining employees for displaying it, and interrogating them about their union sympathies.
• Trevino v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. & Mo. Pac. R.R. Co.
  916 F.2d 1230· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint, alleging a collision with a train on a disused crossing under special circumstances, stated a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the district court erred in dismissing it on the pleadings.
• Nat'l Treas. Emps. Union v. Internal Revenue Serv.
  735 F.2d 1277· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying attorney's fees under the EAJA's "special circumstances" exception without an evidentiary hearing to determine if the parties intended to waive fees in their settlement.
• Sawyer v. McDonald
  165 F.2d 426· 5th Cir.· 1948-01-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that both vessels were at fault for the collision, reversing the lower court's decision which likely found only one party liable.
• Trichilo v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  832 F.2d 743· 2d Cir.· 1987-11-04 ·cited 12×
  A litigant is entitled to attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) for time spent on appeals and fee litigation, even if the government's position on appeal was reasonable, as long as the underlying substantive position was not substantially justified.
• Johnson v. Mortham
  915 F. Supp. 1529· N.D. Fla.· 1996-10-29 ·cited 11×
  Plaintiffs who successfully invalidated a racially gerrymandered congressional district are prevailing parties entitled to attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 against state defendants, notwithstanding their subsequent objections to the legislature's remedial plan. Good faith, la
• Carden v. State OF Mont.
  626 F.2d 82· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-20 ·cited 4×
  Federal courts should not intervene via pretrial habeas corpus in state criminal prosecutions absent "special circumstances" demonstrating irreparable injury or bad faith prosecution.
• Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  600 F.2d 132· 8th Cir.· 1979-06-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the company's rules prohibiting employees from distributing or making "false" statements were overbroad and violated the NLRA, and that the company's discriminatory enforcement of its distribution rule also violated the Act. The court also affirmed the NLRB's
• Top Off. Pros Bus. Servs., Inc. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.
  2024 WL 50239· S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the case should be transferred to the Southern District of Florida under the first-filed rule because the issues and parties are substantially similar to an earlier-filed action in that district.
• Hagman v. Astrue
  546 F. Supp. 2d 1294· M.D. Fla.· 2007-12-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Plaintiff is entitled to EAJA fees because the Commissioner's position was not substantially justified, and that the fees should be paid directly to the Plaintiff's attorney.
• Losinski v. Cnty. OF Trempealeau
  946 F.2d 544· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the victim's estate could not bring a federal due process claim under § 1983 because the state did not create the danger or hold the victim in custody, and that a state law negligence claim against the deputy presented a material issue of fact regarding breach
• Pearman v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
  939 F.2d 521· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint because the estate's allegations, if true, could support a finding of special circumstances that would remove the case from the standing-car rule.
• Nana Gebauer v. State
  706 So. 2d 407· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-03-04
  A Florida appellate court reversed the denial of a mother's petition to reduce child support obligations, holding that while subsequent children are generally not grounds for deviation from guideline support, an exception exists when special circumstances—such as a subsequent chi
• Vingelli v. United States
  992 F.2d 449· 2d Cir.· 1993-05-03
  The attorney-client privilege does not protect client identity or fee information when disclosure does not reveal the confidential purpose for which legal advice was sought.
• Davis v. Bryant Muellar
  643 F.2d 521· 8th Cir.· 1981-03-06
  The state court should not exercise jurisdiction over an Indian arrested in violation of a tribal extradition ordinance, as such action impedes tribal self-government and is preempted by federal law.