Legal Opinion
Cobell v. Norton
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 12, 2002No. CIV.A.96-1285(RCL)PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LAMBERTH, District Judge.
The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that “[a] request for attorney’s fees should not result in a second major litigation.” Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 437, 103 S.Ct. 1933, 76 L.Ed.2d 40 (1983). Nevertheless, the prospect of fee awards often brings out the most miserly (or avaricious) qualities in lawyers, which in turn spawns the urge to produce a massive paper trail. The instant occasion is no exception.
Defendants filed two unmeritorious motions for protective orders. On March 29, 2002, this Court ordered defendants to pay “all reasonable…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Dolores J. Copeland, Individually and on Behalf of the Class of All Others Similarly Situated v. F. Ray Marshall, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984
- National Ass'n of Concerned Veterans v. Secretary of DefenseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
- Covington v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Kaseman v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2004
- Lively v. Flexible Packaging Ass'nDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
- Holbrook v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2004
- Bucher v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Cox v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.