Legal Opinion
Hadix v. Johnson
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided December 4, 1996No. Civil Action 80-73581PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
FEIKENS, District Judge.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs’ counsel in this ease request fees for work performed between January 1, 1996 and June 30, 1996 pursuant to established billing procedures in this case. Defendants contend that hours billed for work performed after April 26, 1996, the enactment date of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub.L. No. 104-134, 1996 (“the Act” or “PLRA”), are subject to its limitation on fees.. Amending 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, the provision of the PLRA at issue stipulates:
No award of attorney’s fees in an action [brought by a prisoner in which attorney…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Hutto v. FinneySupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Bradley v. School Bd. of RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- American Steel Foundries v. Tri-City Central Trades CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
3Cited by7 opinions
- Alexander S. v. BoydCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
- Blissett v. CaseyDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1997
- Morrison v. DavisDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2001
- Hadix v. JohnsonDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1997
- Hadix v. JohnsonDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1999
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.