§Why CasetextPricing

Berry v. Hawaiian Express Ser, et al

MOTION for Attorney Fees Employees Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs

17 Cited authorities

  1. Hensley v. Eckerhart

    461 U.S. 424 (1983)   Cited 21,596 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding a civil-rights plaintiff can recover attorney's fees for claims that "involve a common core of facts or will be based on related legal theories," even if only one of those claims arises under a fee-shifting statute

  2. Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.

    510 U.S. 517 (1994)   Cited 2,827 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988

  3. Crawford Fitting Co. v. J. T. Gibbons, Inc.

    482 U.S. 437 (1987)   Cited 2,690 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that expert witness fees are not available under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) because "when a prevailing party seeks reimbursement for fees paid to its own expert witnesses, a federal court is bound by the limit of § 1821(b), absent contract or explicit statutory authority to the contrary"

  4. Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles

    796 F.2d 1205 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 1,099 times
    Holding that for purposes of claiming a fee award pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, "counsel bears the burden of submitting detailed time records justifying the hours claimed to have been expended."

  5. Entertainment Research Group, Inc. v. Genesis Creative Group, Inc.

    122 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 350 times
    Holding that a party waives an argument on appeal by failing to raise it distinctly

  6. Columbia Pictures v. Krypton Broadcasting

    259 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 266 times
    Holding that district court properly applied these factors when evaluating fee request by prevailing plaintiff in copyright action

  7. Alflex Corp. v. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

    914 F.2d 175 (9th Cir. 1990)   Cited 258 times
    Holding that the cost of "obtaining copies of depositions taken by the opposing party may be considered necessary in certain instances."

  8. Pinkham v. Camex, Inc.

    84 F.3d 292 (8th Cir. 1996)   Cited 171 times
    Holding that the scope of Section 505 costs is equal to the scope of costs recoverable under Sections 1821 and 1920

  9. Studiengesellschaft Kohle v. Eastman Kodak

    713 F.2d 128 (5th Cir. 1983)   Cited 151 times
    Holding that costs of an interpreter are taxable only if "necessarily obtained for use in the case."

  10. Evanow v. M/V Neptune

    163 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 1998)   Cited 72 times
    Holding that defendants could not show prejudice where challenged evidence was "largely duplicative" of unchallenged evidence

  11. Rule 54 - Judgment; Costs

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 54   Cited 41,232 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Holding party seeking fees may additionally seek "nontaxable expenses"

  12. Section 1920 - Taxation of costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1920   Cited 12,514 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Referring only once to "expenses," and doing so solely to refer to special interpretation services provided in actions initiated by the United States

  13. Section 504 - Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits

    17 U.S.C. § 504   Cited 3,597 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Stating that, where "infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000"

  14. Section 505 - Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney's fees

    17 U.S.C. § 505   Cited 2,974 times   70 Legal Analyses
    Granting the district court discretion to award attorney's fees to the prevailing party in copyright cases