Ellis v. Cassidy
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
143 later cases cite Ellis v. Cassidy; 143 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Ellis v. Cassidy?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Abrogated
-
The Supreme Court abrogated Ellis's rule allowing attorneys who represent themselves to recover fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
Kay v. Ehrler · Supreme Court of the United States · filed
A rule that authorizes awards of counsel fees to pro se litigants —even if limited to those who are members of the bar— would create a disincentive to employ counsel whenever such a plaintiff considered himself competent to litigate on his own behalf.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Ellis v. Cassidy and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace