Legal Opinion · Dissent

District of Columbia v. Patterson

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided November 30, 1995No. 93-CV-835, 93-CV-874Published

1DissentWagner, Chief Judge

In my view, plaintiff succeeded on a “ ‘significant issue in litigation which achieve[d] some of the benefit [she] sought in bringing suit;”’ therefore, she is a prevailing party within the meaning of the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Award Act of 1976, 90 Stat. 2641, 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and may be awarded attorney fees thereunder. Texas Teachers Ass’n. v. Garland School Dist., 489 U.S. 782, 791-92, 109 S.Ct. 1486, 1493, 103 L.Ed.2d 866 (1989) (quoting Nadeau v. Helgemoe, 581 F.2d 275, 278-79 (1st Cir.1978)); accord, Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433, 103 S.Ct. 1933, 1939, 76 L.Ed.2d 40…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Texas State Teachers Ass'n v. Garland Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Larry Nadeau v. Raymond A. Helgemoe, Warden, New Hampshire State PrisonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
  5. Hewitt v. HelmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

1 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