27 Cited authorities

Hensley v. Eckerhart
461 U.S. 424 (1983) Cited 21,524 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
Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert
444 U.S. 472 (1980) Cited 1,027 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court properly assessed attorney's fees based on the total fund available to the prevailing class rather than the amount actually recovered
J. I. Case Co. v. Borak
377 U.S. 426 (1964) Cited 1,102 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that “a right of action [under Section 14(a) ] exists as to both derivative and direct causes”
Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards, Inc. v. Berner
472 U.S. 299 (1985) Cited 366 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that in pari delicto would not prevent defrauded tippee from bringing suit against defrauding tipper, at least absent further inquiry into “relative culpabilities” of tippee and tipper
Serrano v. Priest
20 Cal.3d 25 (Cal. 1977) Cited 939 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that denying benefits of the private attorney general rule to funded public-interest attorneys would be essentially inconsistent with the rule itself
IN RE WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYS. LIT
19 F.3d 1291 (9th Cir. 1994) Cited 538 times
Holding that the district court "abuse[d] its discretion in refusing to reconsider its initial decision in light of additional documentation . . . provided by the . . . firm in support of its motion for reconsideration"
Abrams v. Lightolier Inc.
50 F.3d 1204 (3d Cir. 1995) Cited 492 times
Holding that "evidence as to [a supervisor's] attitude toward other older employees and the manner in which he treated them" was relevant to whether supervisor "harbored a discriminatory attitude against older workers, and if credited, that evidence made the existence of an improper motive for the discharge decision more probable."
Harris v. Marhoefer
24 F.3d 16 (9th Cir. 1994) Cited 476 times
Holding that plaintiffs may recover out-of-pocket expenses and expenses related to discovery and expert witnesses under § 1988
In re Omnivision Technologies, Inc.
559 F. Supp. 2d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2008) Cited 251 times
Holding that a class member lacked standing to object to a settlement because he did not show that the defendant caused him any injury
Powers v. Eichen
229 F.3d 1249 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 308 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding a district court abused its discretion by awarding thirty percent of the settlement amount
Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation
15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 Cited 7,445 times 48 Legal Analyses
Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

Candelore v. LDK Solar Co., Ltd. et al

27 Cited authorities

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

Holding that the district court properly assessed attorney's fees based on the total fund available to the prevailing class rather than the amount actually recovered

Holding that “a right of action [under Section 14(a) ] exists as to both derivative and direct causes”

Holding that in pari delicto would not prevent defrauded tippee from bringing suit against defrauding tipper, at least absent further inquiry into “relative culpabilities” of tippee and tipper

Holding that denying benefits of the private attorney general rule to funded public-interest attorneys would be essentially inconsistent with the rule itself

Holding that the district court "abuse[d] its discretion in refusing to reconsider its initial decision in light of additional documentation . . . provided by the . . . firm in support of its motion for reconsideration"

Holding that plaintiffs may recover out-of-pocket expenses and expenses related to discovery and expert witnesses under § 1988

Holding that a class member lacked standing to object to a settlement because he did not show that the defendant caused him any injury

Finding a district court abused its discretion by awarding thirty percent of the settlement amount

Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party