M. D. v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the factors are “neither exclusive nor quantitative, thereby affording leeway to the district courts to evaluate and augment them on a case-by-case basis”
• observing that “it would be unreasonable to consider a factor that inevitably points the same way in every case.”
• considering the \losing party's culpability or bad faith\ and \the losing party's ability to satisfy a fee award\ (emphasis added)
• providing guidance to district courts regarding the decision to award attorneys’ fees under ERISA
• D.C. Circuit stating that “benefit-to-others is an objective factor, and the subjective intent of the plaintiff in filing suit is irrelevant”
• This is no surprise, given the smorgasbord of proceedings in which section 1132(g)(1) may be invoked.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).