Munster Medical Research Foundation, Inc. v. Patricia Hintz

How courts have described this case

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

• awarding fees for securing a preliminary injunction where a subsequent change in regulation rendered the case moot
• outlining three criteria by which a party might demonstrate that it is a prevailing party
• reiterating the Circuit’s prior holding in F.J. Vollmer that “nothing in the text or legislative history of EAJA suggests that Congress intended to make all lawyers practicing administrative law in technical fields eligible for a fee enhancement” (internal quotations omitted
• “it is now clear that Buckhannon’s construction of ‘prevailing party’ also applies to fee claims arising under EAJA”
• “If the Government had acted to moot this case through voluntary cessation before there was a judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties, [Plaintiffs] would not have been prevailing parties.”
• “A party who seeks review of the merits of an adverse ruling, but is frustrated by the vagaries of circumstance, ought not in fairness be forced to acquiesce in the judgment.” (quoting Bancorp, 513 U.S. at 25)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).