Romane J. Rickels v. City of South Bend, Indiana, Fara P. Evans

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the “loser pays” in discovery disputes unless his position was “substantially justified”
• addressing Rule 37’s instructions, now found at Rule 37(a)(5)(B), when a motion to compel is denied
• affirming district court’s order that unrepresented litigant pay reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, under Rule 37(a)(4)
• awarding attorneys’ fees under statutory fee‐shifting rule to party successfully defending district court judgment
• awarding reasonable expenses incurred to defend expenses awarded under Rule 37(a)(5)’s predecessor on appeal
• Rule 37(a)(4) (now contained in Rule 37(a)(5)) “is a fee-shifting rule. The winner is entitled to fees unless the opponent establishes that his position was ‘substantially justified.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).