Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1)
- Attorney's fees (1)
- Blogs (1)
- Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act (1)
- Communication technologies (1)
-
- Constitutional law (1)
- Constitutional rights (1)
- Constitutional torts (1)
- Farrar v. Hobby (1)
- Fee shifting (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Freedom of the Press (1)
- Internet (1)
- Journalism (1)
- Low award low fee (1)
- Nominal damages (1)
- Press Clause (1)
- Prevailing party (1)
- Printing press (1)
- Social media (1)
- Speech Clause (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Attorney’S Fees, Nominal Damages, And Section 1983 Litigation, Thomas A. Eaton, Michael Wells
Attorney’S Fees, Nominal Damages, And Section 1983 Litigation, Thomas A. Eaton, Michael Wells
Scholarly Works
Can plaintiffs recover attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 when they establish constitutional violations but recover only nominal damages or low compensatory damages? Some federal appellate courts have concluded that no fee, or a severely reduced fee, should be awarded in such circumstances. This position, which we call the “low award, low fee” approach, rests primarily on the Supreme Court’s 1992 opinion in Farrar v. Hobby.
We argue that a “low award, low fee” approach is misguided for two main reasons. First, the majority opinion in Farrar is fragmented and the factual record is opaque regarding what and how …
The 'Press,' Then & Now, Sonja R. West
The 'Press,' Then & Now, Sonja R. West
Scholarly Works
Does the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of “the press” simply mean that we all have the right to use mass communication technology to disseminate our speech? Or does it provide constitutional safeguards for a particular group of speakers who function as government watchdogs and citizen surrogates? This question defines the current debate over the Press Clause. The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, along with recent work by Michael McConnell and Eugene Volokh, suggests the answer is the former. This article pushes back on that view.
It starts by expanding the scope of the relevant historical evidence. Discussions about the …