Zessar v. Keith

How courts have described this case

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

• discussing, in an analogous con- text of an award of fees under § 1988, the need for a judgment to be “final” in order to be considered a “pre- vailing party”
• “Whether a case has been rendered moot is a question of law that we review de novo.” (quotations omitted)
• “Usually . . . legislative action will provide [adequate] assurance ... because when the defendants are public officials we place greater stock in their acts of self-correction, so long as they appear genuine.” (quotation and ellipsis omitted)
• discussing recurrence of the complained-of conduct
• discussing recurrence of the complained-of conduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).