Matter of \No Given Name\ O. (Adele O.)

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[t]here is no precise rule or formula for applying the results-obtained factor” (quotation omitted)
• stating that supreme court “ha[s] consistently adopted the lodestar approach whenever a statute contains an explicit directive that an award of attorney fees must be reasonable”
• stating that courts “do not add words or phrases to an unambiguous statute”
• affirming a fee-award reduction under the results-obtained factor when the district court found that it “did not go along with the bulk of [appellant’s] arguments”
• applying the canon noscitur a sociis -Latin for \it is known by its associates\-which requires statutory phrases to be interpreted in light of neighboring statutory language
• defining and applying the associated words canon, which provides that “a word is given more precise content by the neighboring words with which it is associated” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).