Yeheskel Dattner v. Conagra Foods, Inc., Conagra International, Inc., Donald Da Parma, Docket No. 05-5568-Cv

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that party who obtains forum non conveniens dismissal of action is not “prevailing party” entitled to attorney fees because he is not “immunize[d]” from “risk of further litigation on the merits” of claim
• explaining “for a party to be ‘prevailing,’ there must be a ‘judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties.’”
• “[t]he decision to award costs pursuant to Rule 54(d)(1) and Local Rule 54.1 rests within the sound discretion of the district court”
• “[W]e conclude that a defendant who successfully obtains a forum non conveniens dismissal is not a ‘prevailing party’ within the meaning of Rule 54(d).”
• for party to be “prevailing” there must be a “judicially sanctioned change in legal relationship of the parties”
• “[T]he Court [in Buckhannon] did not suggest—and there is no reason to conclude—that the distinction [between costs and fees] affects the meaning of the separate term ‘prevailing party’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).