October Term 2000 · Docket 99-1848
Does a court order that changes policy but lacks a judgment allow fee awards?
the sides that brought the case seek fees for winning a policy change without a judgment. the opposing sides deny fees without a formal court order.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Cleek responded to remarks from other counsel.
Ms. Brinkmann argued the lower court rule contradicts statute text.
Mr. Arceneaux presented a hypothetical scenario for the Court.
Chief Justice Rehnquist closed the oral argument session.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 22-9 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 22-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-2 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 11-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 3-10 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 3-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 21-2 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 21-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-26 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 27-36 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 27-36
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether a party can win attorney fees after a court order changes a policy. The lower court denied fees because no judgment or consent decree existed. the sides that brought the case argue the catalyst theory allows fees for any effective change. the opposing sides argue fees require a formal court order.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 22-9 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 22-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-2 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 11-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 21-2 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 21-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-26 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-26
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 27, 2001.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 3-10 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 3-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 27-36 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 27-36
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want fees for winning a policy change without a judgment.
the opposing sides want to deny fees without a formal court order.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 22-9 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 22-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-2 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 11-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 21-2 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 21-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-26 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-26
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the catalyst theory allows fees for any effective change.
the opposing sides argue fees require a formal court order.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 22-9 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 22-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-2 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 11-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 21-2 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 21-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-26 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-26
What the justices asked
Does a court order that changes policy but lacks a judgment allow fee awards?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 27-36 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 27-36
Why it matters
This dispute defines when lawyers can recover fees for winning policy changes. It affects the cost of enforcing civil rights laws. It shapes how agencies respond to legal challenges.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 22-9 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 22-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-2 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 11-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 21-2 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 21-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-26 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-26
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 3-10 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 3-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 27-36 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 27-36
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 22-9 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 22-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-2 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 11-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 21-2 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 21-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-26 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 22-9 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 22-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-2 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 11-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 21-2 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 21-2
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-26 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-26
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.