1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.4th
  4. 52 F.4th
  5. 52 F.4th 576 (2022)
 

CITIES4LIFE, INC. v. CITY OF CHARLOTTE

No. 21-1322.

52 F.4th 576 (2022)

CITIES4LIFE, INC., a/k/a Cities4Life Charlotte; Daniel Parks; Katherine A. Heldreth, individually and on behalf of her minor son, N.H.; Elijah Boyer; Patrick Courtney, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CITY OF CHARLOTTE, Defendant-Appellant, and Jennifer Roberts, in her official capacity as Mayor of Charlotte; MARCUS D. JONES, in his official capacity as City Manager of Charlotte; Ben Krise, individually and in his official capacity as the City of Charlotte Code Enforcement Division Manager; Mandy Edwards, individually and in her official capacity as a City of Charlotte Code 'E VOL="52" REPORTER="F.4th" NO="577"/> Enforcement Inspector; Mark Fowler, individually and in his official capacity as a City of Charlotte Code Enforcement Inspector; Kimberly T. Sauer, individually and in her official capacity as a City of Charlotte N&BS Area Supervisor; Does, 1-3 individually and in their official capacities as City of Charlotte employees; City of Charlotte Department of Housing and Neighborhood Services; City of Charlotte Division of Code Enforcement, Defendants.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Decided: November 1, 2022.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

ARGUED: Daniel E. Peterson , PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Stephen M. Crampton , THOMAS MORE SOCIETY, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Benjamin R. Sullivan, Jr. , OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. B. Tyler Brooks , LAW OFFICE OF B. TYLER BROOKS, PLLC, Cary, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Diaz wrote the opinion, in which Judge Niemeyer and Judge Quattlebaum joined.

The City of Charlotte appeals the district court's order granting attorney's fees and costs to Plaintiffs, an antiabortion organization and four of its members, following a consent judgment. The district court held that Plaintiffs were "prevailing parties" under 42 U.S.C. § 1988. On appeal, Plaintiffs also urge us to reconsider...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases