Legal Opinion

United States v. David P. True

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided May 17, 2001No. 99-5111PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge.

The Hyde Amendment authorizes reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses to a prevailing party in a criminal case if a court finds that the government’s position was “vexatious, frivolous, or in bad faith.” Pub.L. No. 105-109, § 617, 111 Stat. 2519 (1997), reprinted in 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, Historical and Statutory Notes (hereinafter “18 U.S.C. § 3006A, Statutory Notes”). 1 Defendant David P. True (“True”) appeals from the denial of his application for attorney’s fees and expenses under the Hyde Amendment, following his acquittal by a jury of price-fixing…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Bender v. Williamsport Area School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Miller v. FentonSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Toussie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  5. Janice Adcock-Ladd v. Secretary of Treasury United States Secret Service Department of TreasuryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. John Berry, Jr. v. Michael SchmittCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  2. United States v. Anthony P. Perry v. Tryllous Hossler, Intervenor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
  3. Watson Carpet & Floor Covering, Inc. v. Mohawk Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
  4. United States v. Donald HeavrinCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
  5. United States v. Dimitar PetlechkovCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023

39 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