Skip to main content
· 10/10/1960

Hilbert v. Pennsylvania

Citations

  • 364 U.S. 839

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that appellants did not preserve an issue “[b]y failing to raise this issue in their original briefs”
  • holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in reducing a fee award on this basis, though vacating and remanding other parts of the award
  • not considering an issue appellants failed to raise in their original briefs

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.