· 5/7/1980
William Knighton, Cross-Appellant v. John C. Watkins, Cross-Appellees
Citations
- 616 F.2d 795
- 29 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1535
- 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 17792
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[A] motion for attorney’s fees is unlike a motion to alter or amend a judgment. It does not imply a change in the judgment, but merely seeks what is due because of the judgment. It is, therefore, not governed by the provisions of Rule 59(e).”
- “Thus, a motion for attorney's fees is unlike a motion to alter or amend a judgment. It does not imply a change in the judgment, but merely seeks what is due because of the judgment. It is, therefore, not governed by the provisions of Rule 59(e).”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gee, Rubin, Politz
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.