Gattis v. Duty

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that pending attorney’s-fees claims did not preserve live controversy because the claim on which it was predicated was rendered moot
• holding that pending attorney’s-fees claims did not preserve live controversy because failure to obtain affirmative relief precluded attorney’s-fees award predicated on requirement that party “substantially prevail”
• discussing that whether a party is entitled to recover attorney’s fees under the Open Meetings Act “turns on whether there has been a material alteration in the legal relationship between the parties”
• discussing that whether a party is entitled to recover attorney’s fees under the Open Meetings Act “turns on whether there has been a material alteration in the legal relationship between the parties”
• comparing Government Code section 551.142(b) of Open Meetings Act, which allows attorney’s fees for party who “substantially prevails,” with section 37.009 of Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which does not
• similarly concluding that party’s attorney’s-fees claim under Open Meetings Act was rendered moot when underlying claim became moot and party could no longer “substantially prevail”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).