Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)

Citation
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)
Parent Document
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)
Effective Date
2010-03-16

Other Sections in This Document (232)

Full Text

434 chars
7
        We do not argue with the dissent that the usual procedure is to remand any
further consideration of an attorney fee award to the district court because the district
court typically is “in a better position to perform this time-consuming and fact-
intensive task.” However, based on the circumstances and record of this case, we
believe it is more efficient and appropriate for our court to decide the attorney fee
award now.