Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
a showing that the applicant is a "prevailing party" a showing that the applicant is "eligible to receive an award" a limit on the net worth of the party (see Net worth) an allegation that "the position of the United States was not substantially justified" (see Substantial Justification and Special Circumstances and Scarborough v.
The text of 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) are as follows: "(b) Attorney’s fees In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law 92–318, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or section 12361 ...
It provides that each party is responsible for paying its own attorney's fees, [1] [2] unless specific authority granted by statute or contract allows the assessment of those fees against the other party. In other parts of the world, the English rule is used, under which the losing party pays the prevailing party's attorneys' fees.
Meanwhile, a trial court may, but is not required to, award attorney's fees if a party has made a claim "that lacked substantial justification or...was interposed for delay or harassment, or if [the opposing party] unnecessarily expanded the proceeding by other improper conduct". [31] There are many ways of calculating prevailing-party attorney ...
The United States Constitution and its amendments comprise hundreds of clauses which outline the functioning of the United States Federal Government, the political relationship between the states and the national government, and affect how the United States federal court system interprets the law. When a particular clause becomes an important ...
Sen. James J. Davis (R-PA) and Rep. Robert L. Bacon (R–NY-1), the co-sponsors of the Davis–Bacon Act. The Davis–Bacon Act of 1931 is a United States federal law that establishes the requirement for paying the local prevailing wages on public works projects for laborers and mechanics.
Fantasy pointed out that the Court had interpreted identical language in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, governing discrimination cases, as authorizing such awards to prevailing plaintiffs as a matter of course, but to prevailing defendants only where the suit was frivolous or brought in bad faith. But the Court rejected the analogy ...
The United States is a notable exception to this rule, as except for certain extreme cases, a prevailing party in a US legal proceeding does not become entitled to recoup its legal fees from the losing party. [58] Like the courts, arbitral tribunals generally have the same power to award costs in relation to the determination of the dispute.