Alfonso v. District of Columbia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting “defendants’ invitation to ‘conduct a minute evaluation of each phase or category of counsel’s work’” (quoting Copeland v. Marshall, 641 F.2d 880, 903 (D.C. Cir. 1980))
• “This narrow exception is limited to two types of cases: (1) where the plaintiff deliberately misleads a defendant about the true nature of the case until the thirty- day period expires; or (2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).