Legal Opinion
Julie Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles, a Municipal Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 2, 1987No. 82-6112, 83-6092 and 83-6535PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
The opinion filed August 15, 1986, published at 796 F.2d 1205, is amended as follows:
At page 1212, footnote 4 is amended to read as follows:
There is much confusion in the case law concerning contingent fees and contingent adjustments. See, e.g., LaDuke v. Nelson, 762 F.2d 1318, 1333 (9th Cir.1985) (discussing circumstances justifying enhanced awards under Equal Access for Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412); Moore v. Jas. H. Matthews & Co., 682 F.2d 830, 841 n. 16 (9th Cir.1982) (an enhanced fee due to the contingent nature of a fee arrangement may be justified; however, award should not…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Julie Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Charles Laduke v. Alan C. Nelson, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Moore v. Jas. H. Matthews & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
3Cited by39 opinions
- Gates v. DeukmejianCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Fair Housing of Marin, a California Non-Profit Corporation v. Jack Combs, D.B.A. Waters Edge ApartmentsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Rufus E. Cunningham v. County of Los Angeles, and Richard Eiden, Real-Party-In-Interest-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- H.N. Dang v. Gilbert CrossCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- United Steelworkers v. Phelps Dodge Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.