Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff
Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Argued March 19, 2008 Decided June 2, 2008 | |||||||
Full case name |
Richlin Security Service Company, petitioner v Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security | ||||||
Docket nos. | 06-717 | ||||||
Citations |
128 S. Ct. 2007; 170 L. Ed. 2d 960; 2008 U.S. LEXIS 4522; 76 U.S.L.W. 4360; 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 279 | ||||||
Argument | Oral argument | ||||||
Holding | |||||||
A prevailing party that satisfies EAJA’s other requirements mayrecover its paralegal fees from the Government at prevailing market rates. 472 F. 3d 1370, reversed and remanded. | |||||||
Court membership | |||||||
| |||||||
Case opinions | |||||||
Majority | Alito, joined by Roberts, Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer; Scalia (except part III-A); Thomas (except parts II-B, III) | ||||||
Laws applied | |||||||
Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) (5 U.S.C. § 504; 28 U.S.C. § 2412 |
)
Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff, 553 U.S. 571 (2008), was an appeal of a lower court ruling denying the prevailing party in an administrative action against a government agency the right to recover at market rates the paralegal fees paid as part of the action. The Supreme Court held that 5 U. S. C. §504(a)(1) authorized the recovery of paralegal fees at market rates, and therefore reversed the lower court's ruling.
See also
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Sunday, October 18, 2015. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.