Vincent Koopman v. Water District No. 1 of Johnson County, Kansas, and Roger Fairbanks

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that plaintiff's victory was significant and advanced public purpose by putting district on notice that it must provide its employees with pretermination and post-termination hearings, litigation was not protracted, and claim for damages was not extravagant
• reversing denial of attorney’s fees where the plaintiff was awarded $1.00 in nominal damages
• despite an award of nominal damages, plaintiff’s lawsuit was successful because it put employer on notice that it must provide its employees with constitutionally adequate pretermination and posttermination hearings
• “It is clear that under Farrar v. Hobby, [the plaintiff] is a prevailing party because he was awarded nominal damages.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).