June Roth v. Ilene Pritikin, as of the Estate of Nathan Pritikin, and Patrick M. McGrady

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 court abused its discretion when it employed “post hoc reasoning” to revise an earlier determination that plaintiffs losing claim was not baseless, frivolous, unreasonable, or brought in bad faith and to award defendant attorneys’ fees
• holding that the district court abused its discretion when it employed \post hoc reasoning\ to revise an earlier determination that plaintiff's losing claim was not baseless, frivolous, unreasonable, or brought in bad faith and to award defendant attorneys' fees
• discussing fee awards under the Copyright Act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).