Legal Opinion
Allegheny Bradford Corp. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Decided December 23, 2004No. Slip Op. 04-161; Court 02-00073PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RESTANI, Chief Judge.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Allegheny Bradford Corporation, d/b/a Top Line Process Equipment Company (“Top Line”) seeks an award of attorney fees and expenses under, the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (2002) (“EAJA”). Top Line incurred attorney fees and expenses in the course of a contempt proceeding against the Government, which liquidated Top Line’s tube fittings in violation of the court’s injunction and then retained the monies exacted despite Top Line’s requests for a remedy. Although the Government avoided a contempt holding by complying with a…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- F. D. Rich Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Industrial Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Scarborough v. PrincipiSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Kalvar Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1976
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Jawad v. BarnhartDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2005
- Former Employees of BMC Software, Inc. v. United States Secretary of LaborUnited States Court of International Trade · 2007
- Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2012
- Jazz Photo Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2008
- Delphi Petroleum, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2010
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.