Head v. Medford

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a defendant was the prevailing party when the district court entered summary judgment on plaintiff’s federal claim and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims
• finding that the “prevailing party in the district court for purposes of Rule 54(d) are entitled to their costs unless the district court has some special reason to deny the costs”
• instructing district court on remand to calculate attorney’s fees only for work “realistically attributable solely and exclusively to the plaintiff’s” frivolous claim
• reversing the district court’s refusal to award fees when the plaintiff’s claim was based on establishing a “nonexistent property interest [that was] legally groundless” in view of settled law
• defendants potentially entitled to attorneys' fees on frivolous civil rights claims when district court declines supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims and dismisses them
• “If there are special circumstances that justify an award of no costs … the district court must make these circumstances clear in its order.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).