Pitts v. Vaughn
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
VAN DUSEN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Courtland C. Pitts, who is not an attorney, appeared pro se in his successful civil rights suit for damages and injunctive relief. He now appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (1976 & Supp. IV). We hold that a non-lawyer, pro se litigant is not entitled to attorney’s fees under § 1988, and we affirm the district court’s denial of this motion.
I
Courtland Pitts, an inmate at the Delaware Correctional Center, filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1976 & Supp. IV) in the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Richerson v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
- Michael Alan Crooker v. United States Department of JusticeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1980
- Davis v. ParrattCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1979
- Phyllis A. Barrett v. Bureau of Customs and Department of the TreasuryCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Frisch v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1986
- Mary Williams Cazalas v. United States Department of JusticeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Frank Gonzalez v. William E. KangasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Dennis M. Wolfel v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Rybicki v. State Bd. of Elections of State of Ill.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1984
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.