Rogers Group, Inc. v. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a preliminary injunction was not one that just maintained the status quo where the district court “engaged in a thorough analysis of the probability that [Plaintiff] would succeed on the merits”
• explaining that success on a state claim arising from a common nucleus of operative fact with a § 1983 claim can be considered when examining the reasonableness of attorney fees
• finding plaintiff was a prevailing party because it obtained a preliminary injunction which blocked the defendant from enforcing the challenged ordinance and thus altered the relationship between the parties
• “[A] prevailing party is a party in whose favor a judgment is rendered . . . .” (quotation omitted)
• “[A] claimant is not a prevailing party merely by virtue of having acquired a judicial pronouncement unaccompanied by judicial relief.” (quotation and citation omitted)
• “we hold that Rogers Group is a ‘prevailing party’ entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees pursuant to § 1988, even though the district court never reached its § 1983 claims.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).