§Why CasetextPricing

Ray Pizarro et al v. International Coffee and Tea LLC

MEMORANDUM in Support of Unopposed Motion for Attorneys' Fees, Reimbursement of Expenses and Incetive Award

24 Cited authorities

  1. Hensley v. Eckerhart

    461 U.S. 424 (1983)   Cited 21,567 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. Blum v. Stenson

    465 U.S. 886 (1984)   Cited 8,814 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fee shifting is “to be calculated according to the prevailing market rates in the relevant community, regardless of whether plaintiff is represented by private or nonprofit counsel”

  3. Gates v. Deukmejian

    987 F.2d 1392 (9th Cir. 1992)   Cited 1,683 times
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by applying exception to the forum rule where local counsel were unavailable

  4. Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp.

    290 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 1,074 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding state law governing underlying claims in a diversity action “also governs the award of fees”

  5. Mangold v. California Public Utilities Com'n

    67 F.3d 1470 (9th Cir. 1995)   Cited 1,166 times
    Holding that a plaintiff must present their claim in writing before bringing suit

  6. Fischer v. SJB-P.D. Inc.

    214 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 978 times
    Holding that a district court may reduce hours to offset "poorly documented" billing

  7. Dunleavy v. Nadler

    213 F.3d 454 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 867 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding an incentive award to the class representatives

  8. Churchill Village v. General Electric

    361 F.3d 566 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 735 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that approval of a settlement that received 45 objections and 500 opt-outs out of 90,000 class members was proper

  9. Mathis v. Exxon Corp.

    302 F.3d 448 (5th Cir. 2002)   Cited 740 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding the reasonableness of attorneys' fees is also analyzed under the law of the state providing the substantive rules of decision

  10. Harris v. Marhoefer

    24 F.3d 16 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 479 times
    Holding that plaintiffs may recover out-of-pocket expenses and expenses related to discovery and expert witnesses under § 1988

  11. Section 1032 - Right of prevailing party to recover costs

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032   Cited 1,845 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Governing awards of litigation costs other than fees

  12. Section 12205 - Attorney's fees

    42 U.S.C. § 12205   Cited 1,582 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Permitting the court to allow costs to "the prevailing party"