Legal Opinion
Branstad v. Veneman
District Court, N.D. Iowa
Decided November 5, 2002No. C 00-3072-MWB. No. C 01-3030-MWBPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ APPLICATIONS FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPENSES
BENNETT, Chief Judge.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
/. INTRODUCTION.946
A. The Actions For Judicial Review.946
1. Background.946
2. The court’s ruling .947
B. The Fee Applications.948
1. The Branstads’ applications.948
a. Financial eligibilitg.948
b. Enhanced hourly rate.949
c. Fees claimed.949
2. The Secretary’s Combined Resistance .949
3. The Branstads’Reply.950
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS.951
A. Eligibility For An Award Of Fees And Expenses.951
1. Financial eligibility.951
2. “Prevailing party” status.952
a. Sullivan v. Hudson .952
b.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Shalala v. SchaeferSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Melkonyan v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Texas State Teachers Ass'n v. Garland Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- B & D Land and Livestock Co. v. SchaferDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2008
- Ryan v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007