Matalon v. Hynnes

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that courts must \look at the function performed by a police officer\ when examining whether activity falls within heartland (emphasis in original
• recognizing that “[f]lexibility is the hallmark of the lodestar approach” and that “certain components of fee awards (such as work performed in preparing and litigating fee petitions) may be calculated at discounted rates due to the comparative simplicity of the task”
• reaffirming that clerical and secretarial tasks should not “be billed at lawyers’ rates, even if a lawyer performs them”
• describing that the First Circuit has “never imposed a rigid requirement that a district court employ a core/non-core analysis when adjudicating a fee petition” and that the discretion of whether to apply that distinction remains with the district court
• defining the community caretaking exception to the warrant requirement as involving those responsibilities of police officers discharged separately from their normal criminal enforcement activities
• defining the community caretaking exception to the warrant requirement as involving those responsibilities of police officers discharged separately from their normal criminal enforcement activities

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).