Robert A. Aronson v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that pro se attorney litigants cannot recover fees under the Freedom of Information Act
• holding that plaintiff, who was attorney acting pro se, was not entitled to -6- attorney fees under federal FOIA
• refusing to treat pro se attorney, litigants differently from other pro se litigants who also presumably sacrifice some income to pursue their litigation
• denying fees under Freedom of Information Act based on public policy goal of encouraging pro se plaintiffs to retain independent legal counsel
• reversing a federal court ruling on the grounds that the concurrent state 4 court had prior exclusive jurisdiction over the underlying property even though the state court case 5 was inactive
• “This is not the type of image that enhances public respect for the bar or judiciary.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).