Cruz v. Ayromloo, 66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 725 (2007)

Citation: Cruz v. Ayromloo, 66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 725 (2007)
Parent Document: Cruz v. Ayromloo, 66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 725 (2007)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2007-10-03
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2300425/cruz-v-ayromloo/ ↗

Full Text

656 chars

(N.D.Ill. 1981) 507 F.Supp. 667, 669, 670 (rejecting argument pro bono counsel should not be entitled to a fee award: “Pro bono services by members of the Bar provide an invaluable service to the less fortunate in our society and, thereby, to society as a whole. Congress clearly intended to encourage this tradition of service in the field of civil rights enforcement. Thus, even though individual attorneys or law firms may have the financial resources to absorb the costs of pro bono services, they are entitled to a fee award to encourage future service by them and promote greater respect for our civil rights by all.”). 23 See, e.g., Ketchum v. Moses

Other Sections in This Document (83)

Full Text