Legal Opinion
Bollitier v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided May 8, 1989No. Civ. A. 85-5311PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED OPINION
GERRY, Chief Judge.
Can a pro se plaintiff recover attorney’s fees and costs for a claim brought against a union pursuant to section 101(a)(5) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (“LMRDA”), 29 U.S.C. § 411(a)(5) (1982) challenging his expulsion from the membership of the union? Can an attorney who was forced to withdraw from the litigation prior to trial recover attorney’s fees for an action brought pursuant to the same statute? These are the novel questions before us today. 1
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
We begin by reviewing the matter before us. 2…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Hall v. ColeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Boeing Co. v. Van GemertSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Farmer v. Arabian American Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- In re Fine Paper Antitrust LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- New Leadership Committee v. DavidsonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1998
- Boyadjian v. Cigna CompaniesDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1997
- IMMUNEX CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2021