Search for: "Farrar v. Hobby"
Results 1 - 14
of 14
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jan 2019, 7:00 am
This stems from Farrar v. [read post]
14 May 2019, 6:12 am
Normally, when plaintiffs win only one dollar at trial, they get no fees, as per a Supreme Court ruling, Farrar v. [read post]
2 May 2014, 12:00 am
" Id. at 652 (citing Farrar v. [read post]
2 Nov 2006, 4:38 am
See Farrar v. [read post]
13 May 2014, 8:47 am
Among the most pertinent points the EEOC argues in reply is that CRST ignores controlling Supreme Court precedent cited in the EEOC’s opening brief on the standard for a prevailing civil rights plaintiff (Farrar v. [read post]
27 Jul 2010, 9:52 am
Div. 2000)(quoting Farrar v. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 6:10 am
The decision here tells us nothing about why this fee award was appropriate, but the district court provides some good background in this area, pointing out that, under Farrar v. [read post]
31 Jan 2007, 4:58 am
City of Chicago, 203 F.3d 507, 517 (7th Cir.2000), quoting Farrar v. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 9:53 am
See Barnett v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 6:41 am
In Bunting v. [read post]
5 May 2017, 7:21 am
Hobby, which relied on Hensley v. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 9:27 am
Div. 2000)), certif. denied, 189 N.J. 426 (2007); see also Farrar v. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 3:32 pm
., v. [read post]
18 May 2019, 9:27 am
Rohrmoos Venture v. [read post]
