Cosmic Construction Co. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a district court’s ultimate award of costs in a disability rights action must be supported by factual findings
• holding that plaintiff did not unreasonably protract proceedings by rejecting a proposed IEP that was later used as the basis for final relief; “merely pursuing the proceedings to a final decision did not unreasonably protract the[] proceedings”
• \We have interpreted [the fee-shifting provision of the IDEA] by analogy to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 ....\
• “We have interpreted [the fee-shifting provision of the IDEA] by analogy to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 . . . .”
• plaintiff deemed prevailing party where hearing officer ordered school system to implement a new IEP, and to consider as option the behavioral device sought by plaintiff at the hearing
• “although plaintiff sought ... [an alternative therapy] throughout the proceedings, a broader goal existed as stated in the hearing officer’s first decision: ‘The fundamental purpose of this particular proceeding has become to obtain an appropriate IEP for [the student].’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).