Legal Opinion
Preseault V. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided May 22, 2002No. 91-043LPublishedCited by 110 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MILLER, Judge.
Before the court after argument is plaintiffs’ application for attorneys’ fees and expenses pursuant to the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Land Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, 42 U.S.C. § 4654(c) (1994) (the “URA”). Among the issues to be decided are whether and to what extent plaintiffs can recover under the URA fees for a nonprofit legal services organization and attorneys’ fees incurred in other legal actions prosecuted prior to plaintiffs’ suit in the Court of Federal Claims.
FACTS
Plaintiffs J. Paul and Patricia Preseault (“plaintiffs”) own a fee simple interest…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean AirSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by110 opinions
- Raymo v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Murkeldove v. AstrueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
- Joan Caves v. Secretary of Department of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Applegate v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
- Lopez v. San Francisco Unified School DistrictDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2005
105 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.