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

541 chars
-30-
consuming and fact-intensive task. As a result, I would adhere to our previous cases
in which we have uniformly remanded for the district court to re-calculate the proper
attorneys’ fee award. See, e.g., Lash v. Hollis, 525 F.3d 636, 643 (8th Cir. 2008);
ante, at 27-28 (collecting cases); see also Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 809
(2002) (similarly remanding for a new award calculation); Hensley, 461 U.S. at 440
(same). On this issue alone, I respectfully dissent.
                        ______________________________ -31-