Skip to main content

No. 23-621October Term 2024Decided Feb 25, 2025

Docket 23-621October Term 2024 (2024–2025)

Gerald F. Lackey, in His Official Capacity as the Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles, Petitioner v. Damian Stinnie, et al.

The Supreme Court considered whether plaintiffs who obtain a preliminary injunction but whose case becomes moot before a final judgment are eligible for attorney's fees as "prevailing parties" under federal civil rights law.

Case status

Current stage
Decided
Latest event
Decision released Feb 25, 2025
Case AcceptedApr 22, 2024
Arguments HeardOct 8, 2024
Decision ReleasedFeb 25, 2025
What it's about

The Supreme Court considered whether plaintiffs who obtain a preliminary injunction but whose case becomes moot before a final judgment are eligible for attorney's fees as "prevailing parties" under federal civil rights law. The Court ruled that a preliminary injunction alone does not confer prevailing party status because it is a temporary measure rather than a conclusive resolution of the claims on the merits.

Question presented

Is a party who obtains a preliminary injunction a “prevailing party” for purposes of being entitled to attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C § 1988?

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit / Decision released Feb 25, 2025

Area

Civil Rights