green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
3.8 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1992 ·
…attorney's fees are not ordinarily taxable as costs and are awarded only in extraordinary cases.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Hirschkop v. Snead
See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920 , 2412; but see Lichtenstein v. Lichtenstein, 55 F.R.D. 535 (E.D.Pa. 1972), rev'd. on other grounds 481 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. den. 414 U.S. 1144 , 84 S.Ct. 895 , 39 L.Ed.2d 98 (1974).
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Nacional Financiera v. Americom Airlease, Inc.
(2×)
attorney's fees are not ordinarily taxable as costs and are awarded only in extraordinary cases.
cited
Cited "see"
People v. DeCarlis
See People v. Gill (1973), 54 Ill. 2d 357, 368-69 , cert. denied (1974), 414 U.S. 1144 , 39 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
King v. Harris
(2×)
See Gautreaux v. City of Chicago, 480 F.2d 210 (7th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1144 , 94 S.Ct. 895 , 39 L.Ed.2d 98 (1974); Henry v. Clarksdale Municipal Separate School Dist., 409 F.2d 682 (5th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 940 , 90 S.Ct. 375 , 24 L.Ed.2d 242 (1969); Resident Advisory Bd. v. Rizzo, 425 F.Supp. 987 (E.D.Pa.1976), modified, 564 F.2d 126 (3d Cir. 1977); Blackshear Residents Org. v. Housing Auth. of City of Austin, 347 F.Supp. 1138 (W.D.Tex.1972); Banks v. Perk, 341 F.Supp. 1175 (N.D.Ohio 1972) , aff’d in part, 473 F.2d 910 (6th Cir. 1973) .
discussed
Cited "see"
Walter J. Lander v. Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary of the Department of the Interior
(2×)
See Lichtenstein v. Lichtenstein, supra, 481 F.2d 682 (3rd Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1144 , 94 S.Ct. 895 , 39 L.Ed.2d 98 *1088 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Press v. McNeal
(2×)
See also Lichtenstein v. Lichtenstein, 481 F.2d 682 (3d Cir.1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1144 , 94 S.Ct. 895 , 39 L.Ed.2d 98 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Richard H. White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment Security
Compare Lichtenstein v. Lichtenstein, 55 F.R.D. 535 (E.D.Pa.1972) (although acknowledging that Rule 59(e) would bar a motion to amend the judgment to include attorney’s fees filed after the Rule’s ten-day period had expired, the court instead termed plaintiff’s request as one to amend the Bill of Costs and allowed it despite timeliness objection) (rev’d on other grounds, 481 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1144 , 84 S.Ct. 895 , 39 L.Ed.2d 98 (1974)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lichtenstein
v.
Lichtenstein
v.
Lichtenstein
No. 73-783.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 14, 1974.
Published
Citer courts: S.D. New York (2)
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.