Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Universal-Mca Music Publishing, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting in the attorney-fee context that we “cannot know for sure” whether the court abused its discretion until and “unless such grounds are made explicit”
• collecting cases in which courts of appeal have vacated and remanded for more detailed explanations “when confronted with . . . cursory district court orders,” which prohibited appellate review
• citing, as grounds for remand, the basic principle that, “[f]or the purposes of appellate review, . . . the district court must provide some indication as to why it exercised its discretion as it did”
• de novo review calls for a searching review of ‘the record as a whole. ’
• “[T]he court’s silence prohibits us from examining the soundness of its discretionary judgment.”
• “[T]he court’s silence prohibits us from examining the soundness of its discretionary judgment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).