Legal Opinion
Shaw v. AAA Engineering & Drafting, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided May 18, 2000No. 98-6172, 98-6173, 98-6362PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MURPHY, Circuit Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
AAA Engineering & Drafting, Inc., Wilbur L. Brakhage, and Janice Keelin (collectively “Defendants”) appeal from an Amended Order and Judgment on Attorneys’ Fees and Litigation Expenses. This court concludes that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its award of attorney’s fees, expenses, and costs, and that the award of attorney’s fees for post-judgment enforcement and collection activities was proper under the False Claims Act (“FCA”). This court exercises jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirms.
II. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
I…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean AirSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Robinson v. City of EdmondCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
- Malloy v. MonahanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
- King of the Mountain Sports, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Smith v. Diffee Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- Farmer v. PerrillCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001
- Maughan v. GOOGLE TECHNOLOGY, INC.California Court of Appeal · 2006
- Shaw v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- Miller v. HolzmannCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2008
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.