Palmer v. City of Chicago
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SHADUR, District Judge.
In the latest chapter of this “Chicago Street Files” case, plaintiffs move under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (“Section 1988”) for entry of an interim award of attorneys’ fees and expenses against defendants. 1 Because (1) plaintiffs qualify as “prevailing” under Section 1988 regardless of the outcome of the pending appeal 2 and (2) an interim fee award is appropriate in light of principles recently announced in Hensley v. Eckerhart, — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 1933, 76 L.Ed.2d 40 (1983), this Court awards interim attorneys’ fees for plaintiffs’ counsel’s…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Sosna v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States Parole Commission v. GeraghtySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Bradley v. School Bd. of RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Reuben Palmer v. City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Berberena v. ColerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Spell v. McDanielDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1985
- Roe v. City of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1984
- Coleman v. McLarenDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1986
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.