Legal Opinion
Shannon v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided February 27, 1976No. Civ. A. 69-197PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JOSEPH S. LORD, III, Chief Judge.
Plaintiffs have moved for the award of reasonable attorney fees in this ac tion, now in its seventh year. For purposes of the present motion, it is unnecessary to review in detail the facts of this case which may be found in three previously reported decisions. 1
Plaintiffs are residents, businessmen and representatives of private civic organizations in the East Poplar Urban Renewal Area of Philadelphia. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and certain individual officers thereof are named as defendants. Plaintiffs’ complaint…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. CampSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Sprague v. Ticonic National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Fedorchick v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- Shannon v. United States Department Of Housing And Urban DevelopmentCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978