Martez Jarrett v. State of Arkansas

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 American Rule can be overcome by an “enforceable contract” allocating attorney fees
• explaining that “the poor might be unjustly discouraged from instituting actions to vindicate their rights if the penalty for losing included the fees of their opponents’ counsel”
• explaining that “the poor might be unjustly discouraged from instituting actions to vindicate their rights if the penalty for losing included the fees of their opponents’ counsel”
• noting that “an award of attorney’s fees may be authorized as part of the fine to be levied on the defendant [in a civil contempt action]”
• finding that the Lanham Act did not allow for counsel fees because the original text did not provide for them, nor did any subsequent amendments to the statute
• noting that litigation is uncertain and that parties should not be penalized for defending or prosecuting a lawsuit and that poor might be unjustly discouraged from instituting actions to vindicate their rights if the penalty for losing included attorney fees

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).