green
Positive treatment
16.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 20 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Radiance Capital Receivables Twelve, LLC v. John F. Campbell
Matter of Trinity Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1493 (11th Cir. 1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Got I, LLC v. XRT, Inc, e al.
While it is true that some of our cases have said that, generally, we review a district court’s grant or denial of attorney’s fees for abuse of discretion, see, e.g., In re Application to Adjudge Trinity Indus., 876 F.2d 1485, 1495 (11th Cir. 1989), we note that this determination was made in the context of Rule 11 sanctions, not in the context of a contractual attorney’s fee provision.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
TransUnion Risk & Alternative Data Solutions v. Best One, Inc. (In re TLFO, LLC)
SEC v. Detroit Mem’l Partners, 2016 WL 1169484 , at *1 (quoting In re Trinity Indus., Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1495 (11th Cir. 1989)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Aetna Group USA, Inc., vs Aidco International, Inc.
In re Trinity Indus., Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1496 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Abdul Alansari v. Tropic Star Seafood Inc.
Matter of Trinity Indus., Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1496 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Robert K. v. Cobb County School District
In re Application to Adjudge Trinity Indus., Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1496 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance v. Escambia County
In re Application to Adjudge Trini *734 ty Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1496 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
McCray v. Dawson
Matter of Trinity Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1493 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jove Engineering, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service
Citronelle-Mobile Gathering, Inc. v. Watkins, 943 F.2d 1297, 1304 (11th Cir.1991); In re Trinity Industries, 876 F.2d 1485, 1493 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
National Engineering & Contracting Company v. Occupational Safety And Health Review Commission
We decline to follow Brock in this regard and note, echoing the Eleventh Circuit, "no other circuit requires OSHA to append such documents to its warrant applications." Trinity, 876 F.2d at 1492.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
National Engineering & Contracting Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission
We decline to follow Brock in this regard and note, echoing the Eleventh Circuit, “no other circuit requires OSHA to append such documents to its warrant applications.” Trinity, 876 F.2d at 1492.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Cullens v. Georgia Department of Transportation
A downward adjustment may be appropriate if the result was “partial or limited success.” Id; Matter of Trinity Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1495 (11th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Crossroads Financial, LLC v. Alma-Mater Collection, Inc.
See Matter of Trinity Indus., 876 F.2d at 1493–94. appearance, and then be required to appear before this Court, to be held in custody until Judgment Debtor Kimsey Meharg fully and completely responds to Judgment Creditor’s First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production in Aid of Execution [DE 314-1], or until further Order of the Court, with the writ of bodily attachment, “pickup order,” or arrest warrant, becoming effective after a period of thirty (30) days from the date of its issuance so as to give Judgment Debtor Kimsey Meharg additional time to fully comply with the out…
discussed
Cited "see"
Matter of Concrete Products, Inc.
“If the result was partial or limited success, then the lodestar must be reduced to an amount that is not excessive.” Norman, 836 F.2d at 1302 ; See Matter of Trinity Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1495 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited "see"
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Bankers Alliance Corp.
See Matter of Trinity Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1494 (11th Cir.1989); NOW v. Operation Rescue, 747 F.Supp. at 774 .
cited
Cited "see"
Citronelle-Mobile Gathering, Inc. v. Watkins
See Matter of Trinity Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1493 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited "see"
Citronelle-Mobile Gathering, Inc. v. James D. Watkins
See Matter of Trinity Industries, Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1493 (11th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dole v. Trinity Industries, Inc.
Accord, Matter of Trinity Industries, 876 F.2d 1485, 1492 (11th Cir.1989); Pennsylvania Steel Foundry and Machine Co. v. Secretary of Labor, 831 F.2d 1211, 1215 (3rd Cir.1987); Donovan v. Trinity Industries, 824 F.2d 634 , 636 (8th Cir.1987); Donovan v. Hackney, Inc., 769 F.2d 650, 653 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1081 , 106 S.Ct. 1458 , 89 L.Ed.2d 715 (1985); Donovan v. Enterprise Foundry, 751 F.2d 30, 33 (1st Cir.1984); Stoddard Lumber Co. v. Marshall, 627 F.2d 984, 988-89 (9th Cir.1980); Marshall v. Chromalloy American Corp., 589 F.2d 1335, 1341-42 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Su v. Arps
Jan. 29, 2021) (citing Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger, 581 U.S. 101, 108 (2017)); see also Matter of Trinity Indus., Inc., 876 F.2d 1485, 1496 (11th Cir. 1989) (indicating Secretary may be entitled to attorney’s fees as a contempt sanction in OSHA subpoena enforcement proceedings).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Knagge v. Sullivan
Barring such proof, the Court must ignore the contingency fee agreement and apply the lodestar method, see Sumners v. Sullivan, 730 F.Supp. 99 (M.D.Tenn.1989) (finding contingency fee presumption rebutted and using lodestar method instead), with the burden on counsel to demonstrate the reasonable hourly rate of compensation and the time reasonably expended, see Perkins v. Mobile Housing Bd., 847 F.2d 735 (11th Cir.1988); Norman v. Housing Auth., 836 F.2d 1292 (11th Cir.1988) (setting forth procedures for review of fee requests by lodestar method); see also In re Trinity Indus., 876 F.2d 1485, …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ronald E. SPEARS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
W.E. JOHNSON, Warden, Defendant-Appellee
v.
W.E. JOHNSON, Warden, Defendant-Appellee
88-7062.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Jun 21, 1989.
Ronald E. Spears, Bessemer, Ala., pro se., Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., P. David Bjurberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., Montgomery, Ala., for defendant-appellee.
Hill, Kravitch, Edmondson.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
BY THE COURT:
Since the publication of the Court’s October 19, 1988 opinion, the mandate has been held here. We have discovered that our opinion that the case be transferred was based upon an incorrect premise. The case into which we ordered this case merged had been closed prior to our October 19, 1988 judgment.
The Court has sua sponte reconsidered the case. That portion of the October 19, 1988 opinion which transferred this case to the Middle District of Alabama is VACATED. The case shall remain in the Southern District of Alabama.
The judgment and opinion, other than as stated above, remains in effect. Let the mandate issue.