District of Columbia v. Jeppsen Ex Rel. Jeppsen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the District was a “prevailing party” when one claim against it was dismissed as moot and another claim was dismissed on the merits
• finding that a decision in defendant’s favor both on the merits and on mootness makes a defendant a prevailing party for the purpose of attorneys’ fees
• finding that a dismissal on the merits qualifies the defendant as a prevailing party
• hypothesizing that, in certain circumstances, “[a] ruling on a jurisdictional ground, that the action fails either in law or in fact, might give the defendant all it could receive from a judgment on the merits.”
• finding that a decision in defendant’s favor both on the merits and on mootness makes a defendant a prevailing party for the purpose of attorneys’ fees
• “[W]hen intervening events have mooted the plaintiff’s underlying claim, the plaintiff’s continuing interest in attorneys’ fees does not support her continued standing to pursue the underlying claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).