Legal Opinion
Lawrence v. Staats
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided May 15, 1984No. Civ. A. 77-913PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
FLANNERY, District Judge.
This matter came before the court on plaintiff's motion for the allowance of attorney fees. For the reasons stated below, the court does not believe plaintiff is entitled to fees, and his motion is therefore denied.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff is a former excepted service employee of the General Accounting Office (“GAO”). In May, 1977, he filed a suit in this court alleging that GAO had discriminated against him on the basis of race. Plaintiff, an attorney, appeared pro se, and originally claimed that GAO’s actions violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- New York Gaslight Club, Inc. v. CareySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Tom H. Riddell, Jr. v. The National Democratic Party v. Honorable William L. Waller, Governor of the State of MississippiCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Davis v. ParrattCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1979
- Cofield v. City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Rev. Frank D. Lovell v. Linwood Snow, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Sarah Kattan, by Her Parents and Next Friends Susan J. Thomas and Joseph Kattan, and Cross-Appellants v. District of Columbia, and Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- Corpak, Inc. v. Ramallo Bros. Printing, Inc.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1990
- Frisch v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1986
- Elizabeth D. Duncan v. David B. PoythressCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- Richard B. Kay v. Bremer Ehrler, and the Kentucky Board of ElectionsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.