News & Analysis as of

Preliminary Injunctions Attorney's Fees

Husch Blackwell LLP

Supreme Court Sets the Bar for Recovering Attorneys' Fees in Civil Rights Cases

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lackey v. Stinnie that plaintiffs who gain preliminary injunctive relief before an action becomes moot do not qualify as “prevailing parties” for attorney’s fees under 42...more

Snell & Wilmer

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Section 1988 Attorney’s Fees for Property Owners and Other Civil Rights Litigants

Snell & Wilmer on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lackey v. Stinnie, 145 S. Ct. 659 (2025), limits the ability of civil rights litigants to recover their attorney fees under the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act, specifically...more

ArentFox Schiff

Two New Procedural Wrinkles That May Disincentivize Challenges to Federal Policies

ArentFox Schiff on

The first weeks of the Trump Administration have been defined by executive orders and new policies that were immediately challenged on constitutional or statutory grounds....more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS Makes It Harder for Plaintiffs to Recover Attorney’s Fees: How a Driver’s License Case Could Impact Employers

Fisher Phillips on

A recent Supreme Court ruling could impact your business by limiting when you must pay fees in employment litigation or when you may recover fees after challenging state regulations in court. In the Lackey v. Stinnie decision...more

Venable LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Prohibits Plaintiff Recovery of Attorney’s Fees After a Preliminary Injunction Win

Venable LLP on

On February 25, 2025, the United States Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who obtain a preliminary injunction are not eligible for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) because they do not qualify as “prevailing...more

Epstein Becker & Green

A Preliminary Injunction Does Not a “Prevailing Party” Make, Criminal Conviction Through Knowingly False Evidence Violates Due...

Epstein Becker & Green on

The U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases yesterday, one of which, Lackey v. Stinnie, involved an action brought pursuant to 42 U. S. C. §1983 and should be of particular interest to the many readers of this blog who practice...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Lackey v. Stinnie

On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Lackey v. Stinnie, holding that obtaining a preliminary injunction does not bestow a litigant with the status of “prevailing party,” as required for an award of attorney’s...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - February 25, 2025

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions today: Lackey v. Stinnie, No. 23-621: This case clarifies when attorneys’ fees may be awarded to a “prevailing party” in a civil rights lawsuit via 42 U.S.C....more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS Predictions: Supreme Court Will Make It Harder for Plaintiffs to Recover Attorney’s Fees in Civil Rights Actions and Beyond

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court will soon decide whether obtaining a preliminary injunction is sufficient to qualify as a “prevailing party” in order to recover attorney’s fees in certain civil rights actions – and we predict the Court...more

Vondran Legal

Flava Works sues 23 DOES in Illinois

Vondran Legal on

Flava Works used to file a good number of file-sharing lawsuits.  I have not seen alot lately.  However, they have just filed a mass Doe Defendant lawsuit in Illinois Federal Court (Northern District) alleging copyright and...more

Snell & Wilmer

Frederick Douglass Foundation, Inc., et al. v. District of Columbia: Recent Case Illustrates Importance of Governmental Compliance...

Snell & Wilmer on

Equality under the law is a cardinal principle of the United States’ constitutional order. This principle extends to laws regulating speech. Specifically, the government does not get to single out a particular viewpoint and...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Fourth Circuit Now Permits Awarding Attorney’s Fees for Some Preliminary Injunctions, Bucking Precedent

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Plaintiffs who secure a preliminary injunction may now be able to recover attorney’s fees in the Eastern District of Virginia, due to the Fourth Circuit’s departure from its previous position that such plaintiffs are not...more

Lathrop GPM

New York Appellate Court Dismisses Royalties Claim Because of Franchisor’s Breach Under Preliminary Injunction

Lathrop GPM on

A state appellate court in New York recently held a franchisor was not entitled to unpaid royalty fees because of its own breach of a franchise agreement reinstated by preliminary injunction. Integrity Real Estate Consultants...more

Hogan Lovells

Hollywood Firefighters’ Pension Fund v. Malone: Award of attorneys’ fees as corporate benefit - Quarterly Corporate / M&A...

Hogan Lovells on

In Hollywood Firefighters’ Pension Fund v. Malone Inc., C.A. No. 2020-0880-SG (Del. Ch. Nov. 18, 2021), the Delaware Court of Chancery awarded a US$9.35 million mootness fee on the ground that a preliminary injunction...more

Jaburg Wilk

Your Arizona Employer Has Sued You for Soliciting Its Customers and Employees, Now What?

Jaburg Wilk on

An employer may request that an employee sign a non-solicitation agreement. When the employment ends, the trouble sometimes begins. If you are an Arizona employee and your former employer has sent a demand letter, threatened...more

Stokes Wagner

What Are The Limits Of A Court’s Ability To Enforce A Non-Compete Agreement?

Stokes Wagner on

The parties in the case of Daneshgari v. Patriot Towing Services, LLC, No. A21A0887 (Ga.App. Oct. 21, 2021), had entered into a four-year non-compete agreement in June of 2016 that Daneshgari and his partner began to violate...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

COVID-19 and Unprecedented: Litigation Insights, Issue 33, November 2020

Litigators often refer to so-called "bad facts," which are the facts that have the potential to sink a case with a jury. This 33rd issue of Unprecedented discusses a case with perhaps the worst alleged set of "bad facts" that...more

Patton Sullivan Brodehl LLP

Family Trusts and LLC Membership

LLC members often hold their membership interests in a family trust.  The benefits of trusts are well known — they generally allow assets to be easily transferred after death without the time, hassle, and expense of court...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Chris Lazarini Outlines Court Decision to Uphold Permanent Injunction Against Broker

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Chris Lazarini outlined a court’s decision to uphold a permanent injunction against a broker finding the appellate rules do not allow for an appeal as a matter of right. In this case, a bank sought...more

International Lawyers Network

Supreme Court Settles Circuit Split on When a Plaintiff May Sue

The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous copyright decision in March 2019 with implications for anyone involved in a copyright dispute, as well as for marketers and brands that create and use copyrighted materials. In Fourth...more

Jones Day

Mid-Year Review of Key Trade Secret Decisions

Jones Day on

A trade secret is any information used in one's business that derives independent economic value from not being generally known. Unlike patents, trade secrets are protected indefinitely for as long as they remain a secret....more

FordHarrison

Non-Compete News: Sixth Circuit Gives Attorneys' Fees to Employer

FordHarrison on

This month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s award of attorneys’ fees to an employer after it had been granted a preliminary injunction against its former employees. See Kelly...more

Holland & Knight LLP

A Dismissal Without Prejudice May Not Support Fee Award Under the DTSA

Holland & Knight LLP on

In a case of first impression, Judge Gregg Costa of the Fifth Circuit, affirming a lower court decision, held that a dismissal without prejudice of a Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) case does not support a prevailing-party...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

2017 and Early 2018 Supreme Court and Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

2017 Supreme Court and Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit, With Some Significant Cases from 2016

Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more

34 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide