Hensley v. Eckerhart

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

Pierce v. Underwood

Holding 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

Buckhannon Board Care Home v. West Va. D.H.H.R

Holding that a party becomes a prevailing party once there is a "judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties"

Texas Teachers Assn. v. Garland School Dist

Holding that where party seeks attorney's fees pursuant to fee-shifting statute, "no fee award is permissible until the [party] has crossed the statutory threshold of prevailing party status" (internal quotation marked omitted)

Jean v. Nelson

Holding "that the United States may not oppose a `fees for fees' request [under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412,] solely on the ground that its position in the fee litigation was substantially justified"

United States v. Florida East Coast R. Co.

Holding that a statute's use of the word “hearing” did not “by its own force require [an agency] either to hear oral testimony, to permit cross-examination ..., or to hear oral argument”

Role Models America, Inc. v. Brownlee

Holding that the government's position was not substantially justified notwithstanding the fact that it had been accepted by the district court

National Ass'n of Concerned Veterans v. Secretary of Defense

Holding that a fee application must "contain sufficiently detailed information about the hours logged and the work done"

In re North

Holding that a ten percent reduction in the requested hourly rates is appropriate if a party fails to provide any evidence of "the qualifications of particular professionals"

Action on Smoking and Health v. C.A.B

Holding that the time limitation for filing an initial application for attorneys' fees and expenses under the EAJA is jurisdictional

Section 1331 - Federal question

Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

Section 1291 - Final decisions of district courts

Granting jurisdiction to the courts of appeals from final decisions of federal district courts "except where a direct review may be had in the Supreme Court"

Rule 23 - Class Actions

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Section 2412 - Costs and fees

Limiting the eligibility of individuals and entities to claim attorney's fees under EAJA to those who "net worth" is under specified amounts

Section 2201 - Creation of remedy

Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment

Section 1920 - Taxation of costs

Referring only once to "expenses," and doing so solely to refer to special interpretation services provided in actions initiated by the United States

Section 1651 - Writs

Granting us the power to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of [our] . . . jurisdiction[] and agreeable to the usages and principles of law"

Section 702 - Right of review

Granting judicial review of "agency action"

Section 551 - Definitions

Adopting the definition set out in the APA

Section 704 - Actions reviewable

Granting judicial review over " final agency action"

Section 201.5 - Drugs; adequate directions for use

Defining "adequate directions for use" as "directions under which the layman can use a device safely and for the purposes for which it is intended"

Section 601.4 - Issuance and denial of license