Legal Opinion
Hardy v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 9, 2017No. Civil Action No. 2015-1649Published
1Opinion of the Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DAVID T. HARDY, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 15-1649 (BAH) v. Judge Beryl A. Howell BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiff, David T. Hardy, seeks attorneys’ fees and costs as a “prevailing party” under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E), Pl.’s Mot. Att’ys’ Fees (“Pl.’s Mot.”) at 1, ECF No. 36, in this lawsuit challenging aspects of the response by defendants, the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) and Bureau of…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Robert G. Vaughn v. Bernard Rosen, Executive Director, United States Civil Service CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- Fox v. ViceSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Harold Weisberg v. U.S. Department of Justice, (Two Cases). Harold Weisberg v. U.S. Department of Justice. (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.