Legal Opinion

American Council of the Blind v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided February 13, 2001No. CIV.A.96-2058 (RMU)PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

URBINA, District Judge.

DENYING THE PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES; DISMISSING THE CASE AS MOOT

I. INTRODUCTION

This matter comes before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion to recover attorneys’ fees. The plaintiffs, the American Council of the Blind, et al. (“the plaintiffs” or “ACB”) seek attorneys’ fees and costs from the Federal Transit Administration (“the FTA”), the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) (collectively the “Federal Defendants”), and the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (“WMA-TA”). The plaintiffs contend that because they prevailed in…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. David A. Clarke v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1990
  4. City of Houston, Texas v. Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1994
  5. Stivers v. PierceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. FC INVESTMENT GROUP LC v. LichtensteinDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
  2. ALLINA HEALTH SERVICES v. SebeliusDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
  3. Friends of Animals v. SalazarDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
  4. Allina Health Services v. SebeliusDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
  5. Friends of Animals v. SalazarDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API