Susan J. Carroll v. Wolpoff & Abramson

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding only $500 in attorneys' fees pursuant to a man- datory fee provision--in contrast to the plaintiff's request for almost $9,800--when the plaintiff received only $50 in statutory damages
• affirming the district court’s award of $500 in attorneys fees where plaintiff obtained only $50 in damages
• comparing an award under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act to an award under the TILA
• affirming the district court’s decision to lower the attorneys’ fee in a case involving a technical violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”
• affirming reduction to roughly 5% of fees requested because damages award was 5% of damages sought
• noting the \systemic costs of such appeals [of requests for attorney's fees] are often disproportionate to the limited benefits achieved by appellate second-guessing of a district court's fee calculation\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).