Legal Opinion
Council for Tribal Employment Rights v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided April 8, 2013No. 12-326CPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Motion for award of fees and expenses incurred in connection with a successful motion to compel discovery; RCFC 37(a)(5); absence of substantial justification for opposing party’s position
ORDER
LETTOW, Judge.
In this contract ease, plaintiff, Council for Tribal Employment Rights (the “Council”), has moved for an award of attorney’s fees and costs incurred in securing an order compelling the government to respond to discovery requests. In its motion, the Council invokes Rule 37(a)(5)(A) of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”), arguing that its motion to compel essentially was…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Brenda Chilcutt v. United States of America, Randell P. Means, in His Individual CapacityCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- Elion v. JacksonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- Athridge v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1998
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jordan v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Petro-Hunt, L.L.C. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Fairholme Funds, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- Penna v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
- Topsnik v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016