42 Cited authorities

District of Columbia et al. v. Heller
554 U.S. 570 (2008) Cited 3,563 times 50 Legal Analyses
Holding it irrelevant to the constitutionality of D.C.'s "handgun" ban that the law allowed citizens the possession of substitutes, like "long guns"
Buckhannon Board Care Home v. West Va. D.H.H.R
532 U.S. 598 (2001) Cited 3,823 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that a party becomes a prevailing party once there is a "judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties"
Perdue v. Kenny A.
559 U.S. 542 (2010) Cited 2,494 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that enhancement is permitted only in "rare circumstances in which the lodestar does not adequately take into account a factor that may properly be considered"
McDonald v. City of Chicago
561 U.S. 742 (2010) Cited 2,342 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Second Amendment applies to the states, through incorporation under the Fourteenth Amendment
Fox v. Vice
563 U.S. 826 (2011) Cited 1,803 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that district courts "may use estimates in calculating and allocating an attorney's time[, a]nd appellate courts must give substantial deference to these determinations"
Missouri v. Jenkins
491 U.S. 274 (1989) Cited 2,334 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that reasonable attorney's fees includes the costs of paralegals' time
Kay v. Ehrler
499 U.S. 432 (1991) Cited 880 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the category of pro se attorney-plaintiffs are excluded from recovery under § 1988
Ezell v. City of Chicago
651 F.3d 684 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 530 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a supplier of firing-range facilities had standing to challenge a Chicago ordinance that burdened its potential customers' firearms training
Pickett v. Sheridan Health Care Ctr.
664 F.3d 632 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 364 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the attorney's substantial evidence pointed to a rate lower than the one requested, but observing that if defendant had submitted no evidence on this issue, then the district court would be required to award fees at plaintiff's proposed rate
G & S Holdings LLC v. Cont'l Cas. Co.
697 F.3d 534 (7th Cir. 2012) Cited 301 times
Finding that plaintiffs whose claims arose from duties owed not to them, but to a third party, were not real parties in interest
Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
42 U.S.C. § 1983 Cited 490,212 times 694 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation
Section 1988 - Proceedings in vindication of civil rights
42 U.S.C. § 1988 Cited 21,850 times 43 Legal Analyses
Finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1920 defines the term "costs" as used in Rule 54(d) and enumerates the expenses that a federal court may tax as a cost under the discretionary authority granted in Rule 54(d)

Shepard et al v. Madigan et al

42 Cited authorities

Holding it irrelevant to the constitutionality of D.C.'s "handgun" ban that the law allowed citizens the possession of substitutes, like "long guns"

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

Holding that enhancement is permitted only in "rare circumstances in which the lodestar does not adequately take into account a factor that may properly be considered"

Holding that the Second Amendment applies to the states, through incorporation under the Fourteenth Amendment

Holding that district courts "may use estimates in calculating and allocating an attorney's time[, a]nd appellate courts must give substantial deference to these determinations"

Holding that reasonable attorney's fees includes the costs of paralegals' time

Holding that the category of pro se attorney-plaintiffs are excluded from recovery under § 1988

Holding that a supplier of firing-range facilities had standing to challenge a Chicago ordinance that burdened its potential customers' firearms training

Holding that the attorney's substantial evidence pointed to a rate lower than the one requested, but observing that if defendant had submitted no evidence on this issue, then the district court would be required to award fees at plaintiff's proposed rate

Finding that plaintiffs whose claims arose from duties owed not to them, but to a third party, were not real parties in interest

Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

Finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1920 defines the term "costs" as used in Rule 54(d) and enumerates the expenses that a federal court may tax as a cost under the discretionary authority granted in Rule 54(d)