Electoral candidate who defended against lawsuit challenging voters' pamphlet statement was entitled under private attorney general doctrine to attorney fees for litigating scope of electoral statute.
District court's order excluding evidence of sexual assault lacked adequate supporting explanation where court's identification of evidence to be excluded was vague and ruling was finalized by means of one-sentence order lacking findings or explanation.
District court's jurisdiction to hear claim filed while state court judgment on plaintiff's inextricably intertwined claim was pending ceased as soon as state court entered judgment on that claim.
Feeds |
Contact