SALCER ET AL.

v.

ENVICON EQUITIES CORP. ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2751 (U.S. 2014)
• Fleischhauer v. Feltner, 879 F.2d 1290 (6th Cir. 1989)
  …atute seeks rescission plus deterrence, therefore, denying defendants the benefit of offsetting tax benefits generated by their illegal offering is an appropriate result. See also Freschi v. Grand Coal Venture, 767 F. 2d 1041 (2d Cir.1985); vacated, 478 U.S. 1015, 106 S..Ct. 3325, 92 L.Ed.2d 731, on remand, 800 F. 2d 305, reconsidered, 806 F. 2d 17 (Supreme Court remanded to determine tax question in light of Randall and Sedima). Plaintiffs’ award should not be reduced by tax benefits, if any, received. Fin…
• Rode v. Dellarciprete, 892 F.2d 1177 (3d Cir. 1990)
  …nc., 884 F. 2d 713 (3d Cir.1989). The district court cannot “decrease a fee award based on factors not raised at all by the adverse party.” Id. at 720; see Cunningham v. City of McKeesport, 753 F. 2d 262, 267 (3d Cir.1985), vacated on other grounds, 478 U.S. 1015, 106 S.Ct. 3324, 92 L.Ed.2d 731, reinstated, 807 F. 2d 49 (3d Cir.1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1049, 107 S.Ct. 2179, 95 L.Ed.2d 836 (1987). Once the adverse party raises objections to the fee request, the district court has a great deal of discreti…