Electric By Miller, Inc.
5 Cited authorities
Pierce v. Underwood
487 U.S. 552 (1988) Cited 9,354 times 10 Legal AnalysesHolding that when Congress reenacts a statute without changing its language, and when there is no indication that “Congress thought it was doing anything ... except reenacting and making permanent” the earlier legislation, a court should not give weight to legislative history pertaining to the reenactment
Commissioner, INS v. Jean
496 U.S. 154 (1990) Cited 2,648 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that this inquiry applies to attorney's fees under the EAJA
Hoang Ha v. Schweiker
707 F.2d 1104 (9th Cir. 1983) Cited 49 timesDeclining to award fees when the government argues for "a novel but credible extension or interpretation of the law"
Timms v. United States
742 F.2d 489 (9th Cir. 1984) Cited 30 timesNo. 83-2029. Argued and Submitted December 15, 1983. Decided September 5, 1984. Fred Luyties, Molloy, Jones, Donahue, Trachita, Childers Mallamo, Tucson, Ariz., for plaintiffs-appellants. Kristina E. Harrigan, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Before HUG, PREGERSON, and NORRIS, Circuit Judges. HUG, Circuit Judge: After prevailing in a tax refund suit, appellants sought recovery of attorneys' fees under
Section 504 - Costs and fees of parties
5 U.S.C. § 504 Cited 662 times 6 Legal AnalysesAuthorizing payment of attorney's fees by the Government when a party prevails in a federal agency adjudication