Legal Opinion

Palmer v. City of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided November 18, 1983No. 82 C 2349PublishedCited by 7 opinions

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

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Sosna v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. United States Parole Commission v. GeraghtySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. 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

  1. Reuben Palmer v. City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
  2. Berberena v. ColerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
  3. Spell v. McDanielDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1985
  4. Roe v. City of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1984
  5. Coleman v. McLarenDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1986

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API