Legal Opinion
Hepperle v. Panama MacHinery & Supply Co.
District Court, N.D. Florida
Decided February 23, 1982No. MCA 80-0239PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY’S FEES
HIGBY, District Judge.
The plaintiff, Mr. Hepperle, sued the defendants under Title 42, United States Code, Section 1983, claiming they denied him federally protected rights under color of state law. His claims against two judges were dismissed. (Doc. 19). His claims against the remaining defendants were not dismissed only because Mr. Hepperle was a pro se litigant whose claims were entitled to the most liberal of constructions. Id. Eventually the remaining defendants were granted summary judgment. 532 F.Supp. 1083. All remaining defendants seek attorney fees…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hughes v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lopez v. Aransas County Independent School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
- Harris v. Plastics Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Smith v. Smythe-Cramer Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
- Hepperle v. Panama MacHineryCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
- Hepperle v. Panama MacHineryCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- Smith v. Smythe-Cramer CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985