Philecia Barnes v. City of Cincinnati

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that transsexual plaintiff stated a claim for sex discrimination“by alleging discrimination . . . for his failure to conform to sex stereotypes”
• holding that “the fact that the [losing party’s] interpretation of the evidence is itself reasonable does not entitle it to a new trial”
• holding post-trial judgment as a matter of law improper unless “reasonable minds could come to but one conclusion in favor of the moving party”
• holding post-trial judgment as a matter of law improper unless “reasonable minds could come to but one conclusion in favor of the moving party”
• noting that a district court has discretion to award current market rates, rather than historical market rates, when a case has been ongoing for several years and plaintiff’s counsel accordingly experienced a delay in compensation
• affirming the district court’s attorney’s fee award that included a 1.75 multiplier in part because of the “novelty and difficulty” of the legal question

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).