Holding: In cases governed by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(d), district courts must apply as much of a judgment in a federal civil rights suit as necessary, up to 25 percent, to satisfy an award of attorney’s fees.
You May Also Like
Yellen v. Collins
legaladmin
Holding: Because the Federal Housing Finance Agency did not exceed its authority under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 as a conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,…
Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe I
Holding: To plead facts sufficient to support a domestic application of the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, plaintiffs must allege more domestic conduct than general corporate activity. Judgment: Reversed and…
Trump v. New York
Holding: Because the challengers have not shown standing and because the claims presented are not ripe for adjudication, the district court’s judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded with…
Van Buren v. United States
Holding: An individual “exceeds authorized access” under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2), when he accesses a computer with authorization but then obtains information…
Cargill, Inc. v. Doe I
Holding: To plead facts sufficient to support a domestic application of the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, plaintiffs must allege more domestic conduct than general corporate activity. Judgment: Reversed and…
CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service
Holding: A suit to enjoin IRS Notice 2016–66 does not trigger the Anti-Injunction Act even though a violation of the notice may result in a tax penalty. Judgment: Reversed and remanded,…
