Cases: Civil Rights

Civil Rights: Mentally Disabled Prevailing Party Entitled To Fees Where Confidential Records Disclosed Negligently Or Willfully And Knowingly To Others Not Entitled To See Them

Cases: Civil Rights

Welfare & Institutions Code Section 5330(d) So Provides.              In Doe v. County of Orange, Case No. G064562 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 2, 2025) (published), the appellate court reminds us that Welfare & Institutions Code section 5330(d) allows a mentally disordered person to recover reasonable attorney’s fees, on a mandatory basis, by a […]

Civil Rights: $610,050 FEHA Fee Award Affirmed In Case Where Plaintiff Obtained $4 Million Judgment Against City of L.A.

Cases: Civil Rights

Lower Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion On The Fee Award—It Cut The Requested Fees By $525,342.75.                In Carranza v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. B327196 (2d Dist., Div. 7 May 23, 2025) (partially published; fee discussion not published), a plaintiff sued City of Los Angeles under FEHA for a hostile work environment

Allocation, Civil Rights: Plaintiff Prevailing on a Bane Act Claim Awarded $829,702.50 In Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Civil Rights

Although She Was Unsuccessful On Some Claims, The Work Was Interrelated Such That Neither Allocation Nor A Further Reduction Was Required.                In Gonzalez v. County of Fresno, Case No. F086776 (5th Dist. Apr. 16, 2025) (unpublished), plaintiff recovered on a Bane Act claim (which has a fee-shifting statute), even though she failed to recover

Civil Rights, Costs: Failure To Consider Plaintiff’s Financial Position In FEHA Costs Award Led To A Reversal

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs

Other Items Also Had To Be Revisited.                In the FEHA area, if appropriately raised, lower courts must take into account plaintiff’s financial situation in making a costs award against a non-prevailing FEHA plaintiff even where plaintiff’s case was deemed frivolous.  The lower court did award costs against the plaintiff, finding indigency was irrelevant in

Civil Rights, Costs: Lower Court’s Award Of Costs Against Dismissing FEHA Plaintiff Reversed As A Matter Of Law.

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs

No Indication Case Was Frivolous.                We have posted on an emerging trend in FEHA cases, which is that routine costs cannot be assessed against a non-prevailing plaintiff unless the case is deemed frivolous. Vanrooy v. Jacobes-Downing-Hughes, Inc., Case No. C100312 (3d Dist. Apr. 7, 2025) (unpublished) is a continuation of that theme.  There, plaintiff’s claims

Civil Rights, Prevailing Party: SCOTUS Decides That A Preliminary Injunction Mooted By Subsequent Events Does Not Make One A Prevailing Party Under The Civil Rights Fee Shifting Statute

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Prevailing Party

However, A Footnote In the Opinion Shows That This Is A Nuanced Issue Depending On Objectives Of Plaintiff Or Defendant.                We now report on a recent SCOTUS decision under the civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b), which provides when a “prevailing party” can recover fees.  This case is interesting and may have repercussions

Civil Rights, Prevailing Party, Settlement, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Stipulated Judgment To Enforce Settlement Had Post-Judgment Enforcement Language Carve-Out Allowing For Further Post-Enforcement Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Settlement, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Also, On Remand, Trial Judge Had To Determine If Plaintiffs Prevailed In Voting Rights Act Case; And, If So, Amount Of Further Fees To Be Awarded.                In Robles v. City of Ontario, Case No. G064119 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 6, 2024) (published; originally issued unpublished on October 24, 2024), plaintiffs alleged that defendants

Civil Rights: $55,414.84 Attorney’s Fees Award Under ADA Against Plaintiff’s Attorneys Reversed On Appeal, Although Plaintiff Dismissed A Website Action After Not Opposing A Summary Judgment Motion

Cases: Civil Rights

Appellate Court Concluded That ADA Statute’s Silence On Fee Award Against Plaintiff’s Attorneys Was Dispositive.                Statistically speaking, California state and federal courts (especially federal courts) are inundated with ADA disability lawsuits, many based on Website disabilities for disabled persons.  The next case establishes, as far as ADA claims are concerned, dismissals or judgments against

Civil Rights: The Price Of A Frivolous ADA Hotel Accessibility Action In Terms Of Attorney’s Fees—Plaintiff Was Hit With A $57,604.90 Adverse Fee/Costs Award

Cases: Civil Rights

Voluntary Dismissal Before Opposition To Summary Judgment Motion Did Not Do The Trick.                In Garcia v. Zarco Hotels Incorporated, Case No. B332298 (2d Dist., Div. 1 July 29, 2024) (unpublished), plaintiff brought an ADA suit challenging a hotel’s accessibility policies to enable disabled persons to determine whether the hotel’s common areas and room were

Civil Rights, Sanctions: 4/3 DCA Reverses $98,852 Sanctions Award Under CCP § 128.7 After Concluding That Plaintiff Successfully Defeated Summary Judgment Motion On ADA And Related Claims

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Sanctions

For ADA/Disability Practitioners, A Disabled’s Successor May Have Standing To Pursue ADA And Related Claims For Injunctive Relief.                In Saurman v. Peter’s Landing Property Owner, LLC, Case No. G061561 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 26, 2024) (published), the Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment grant and $98,852 CCP § 128.7 sanctions award against

Scroll to Top