Quentin Young v. City of Chicago , 202 F.3d 1000 ( 2000 )


Menu:
  • 202 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir. 2000)

    Quentin Young, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
    v.
    City of Chicago, Defendant-Appellant.

    Nos. 99-1712, 99-2503, 99-2855 & 99-2856

    In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

    Submitted January 13, 2000
    Decided February 4, 2000

    Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. Nos. 96 C 4554, 96 C 4622 & 96 C 4457--James B. Moran, Judge.

    Before Posner, Chief Judge, and Coffey and Manion, Circuit Judges.

    Per Curiam.

    1

    In 1996 the Democratic national convention was held in Chicago and the city authorities, determined to prevent a repetition of the riots that had occurred in 1968 (the last time the Democratic convention was held in Chicago), established a security perimeter around the convention center and excluded all protesters, in alleged violation of the First Amendment. Would- be demonstrators obtained an injunction against the City. The City waited until the convention was over before appealing the injunction, and we therefore dismissed the appeal as moot, the injunction having been limited to demonstrations at that convention. The plaintiffs then moved in the district court for, and obtained, an award of attorneys' fees. The City appeals from that award, arguing that since the suit became moot before a definitive determination of its merits by this court, the plaintiffs cannot obtain fees. Not so. A defendant cannot defeat a plaintiff's right to attorneys' fees by taking steps to moot the case after the plaintiff has obtained the relief he sought, for insuch a case mootness does not alter the plaintiff's status as a prevailing party. E.g., National Black Police Ass'n v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & Ethics, 168 F.3d 525, 528-29 (D.C. Cir. 1999); Associated General Contractors of Connecticut, Inc. v. City of New Haven, 41 F.3d 62, 68 and n. 9 (2d Cir. 1994); Martinez v. Wilson, 32 F.3d 1415, 1422 n. 8 (9th Cir. 1994); Dahlem v. Board of Education, 901 F.2d 1508, 1512 (10th Cir. 1990); Grano v. Barry, 783 F.2d 1104, 1108-09 (D.C. Cir. 1986); Bishop v. Committee on Professional Ethics, 686 F.2d 1278, 1289- 91 (8th Cir. 1982). And the amount sought here was reasonable.

    2

    Affirmed.

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-1712, 99-2503, 99-2855, 99-2856

Citation Numbers: 202 F.3d 1000, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 1424

Judges: Posner, Coffey, Manion

Filed Date: 2/4/2000

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024

Cited By (15)

Bart McQueary v. Jack Conway , 508 F. App'x 522 ( 2012 )

elizabeth-kinney-regional-director-of-region-13-of-the-national-labor , 272 F.3d 924 ( 2001 )

Manuel De Jesus Ortega Melendr v. Paul Penzone ( 2018 )

Kinney Ex Rel. National Labor Relations Board v. Federal ... , 272 F.3d 924 ( 2001 )

Sierra Club v. Department of Transportation of the State , 120 Haw. 181 ( 2009 )

Dupuy, Jeff v. Samuels, Bryan ( 2005 )

Roll v. Howard ( 2022 )

Daniel Tumpson v. James Farina (072813) , 218 N.J. 450 ( 2014 )

Belinda Dupuy, Pilar Berman, Norman Berman v. Bryan Samuels,... , 423 F.3d 714 ( 2005 )

Higher Taste, Inc. v. City of Tacoma , 717 F.3d 712 ( 2013 )

McQueary v. Conway , 614 F.3d 591 ( 2010 )

Trading Technologies International, Inc. v. Espeed, Inc. , 750 F. Supp. 2d 962 ( 2010 )

National Rifle Ass'n of America, Inc. v. Village of Oak Park , 755 F. Supp. 2d 982 ( 2010 )

McCormick v. Zero , 134 F. Supp. 2d 978 ( 2001 )

Tri-City Community Action Program, Inc. v. City of Malden , 680 F. Supp. 2d 306 ( 2010 )

View All Citing Opinions »