Mah Ket v. Weedin

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a party can be entitled to attorneys’ fees based on interim injunctive relief resulting from a determination of the merits
• explaining that district court “reserved decision on plaintiff’s fee request” until underlying case was mooted
• explaining that regardless of “whether . . . the district court’s injunction should be considered a negative or mandatory injunction, the district court’s decision to issue the injunction was clearly based on the likelihood of the plaintiff’s success on the merits”
• affirming an award of attorney’s fees, after issuance of a preliminary injunction, where the district court required a showing of likelihood of success on the merits
• \[T]he district court's decision to issue the injunction was clearly based on the likelihood of the plaintiff's success on the merits.\
• failure to plead § 1983 is not fatal to a claim for attorney’s fees if the pleadings and evidence present a substantial claim for which § 1983 provides a remedy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).