Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 8 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Taucher, Frank v. Brown-Hruska, Sharon.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Taucher, Frank v. Brown-Hruska, Sharon Anchor | green | “once an applicant's status as a prevailing party is established, the government has the burden of showing that its legal position was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust.” | 4 |
| 2 | Paul D. Halverson,appellants v. Rodney E. Slater, Secretary, United States Department of Transportation | green | “the government has the burden of proving that its position, including both the underlying agency action and the arguments defending that action in court, was 'substantially justified' within the meaning of the act.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.