Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Fast and Furious sentencings | Main | Bit of a media turnaround »

NRA recovers another $98,000 against Chicago

Posted by David Hardy · 28 November 2012 10:37 AM

It's an a supplemental award of attorney fees -- meaning fees for time spent litigating the original award of fees. Chicago opposed the original motion, arguing that since it repealed its handgun ban ordinance after the Supreme Court ruling, but before the trial court filed a judgment striking it down, NRA was not a "prevailing party." Chicago won in the trial court on that argument, but the Seventh Circuit reversed the ruling.

2 Comments | Leave a comment

CDR_D | November 28, 2012 5:41 PM | Reply

Wish it were 98 million, instead of what we got...

Ike | November 29, 2012 10:00 AM | Reply

It's no big deal for Chicago (or any city....) - a tiny increase in sales tax or property tax, and no taxpayer will even notice.

Leave a comment