Cases: Civil Rights

Civil Rights, Employment, Section 998:  Fee And Costs Award To Successful Defendants Had To Be Reversed And Remanded Based On Failure To Make Findings On Frivolousness For Purposes Of Labor Code Section 218.5 Claim

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Employment, Cases: Section 998

However, 4/2 DCA Denied Expert Witness Fees To Unsuccessful FEHA Plaintiff Rejecting CCP § 998 Offer, Parting Company With Contrary Results By 1/5 And 4/1 DCAs.             We have to say that 2018 has started out with a bang, producing a decision by the Fourth District, Division 2 acknowledging it is parting company from the […]

Civil Rights:  Limited Success Did Justify District Court’s 50% Reduction In Fee Request In ADA Case

Cases: Civil Rights

District Court’s Articulation Of Reduction Was Clear Enough.             Getting a shave. "Uncle Joe Cannon getting one of his last congressional shaves. Bert Broden has been Uncle Joe's barber for the past twelve years."  Feb. 26, 1923.  Library of Congress.                 In Dunlap v. Liberty Natural Products, Inc., Nos. 15-35395/16-35113 (9th Cir. Dec. 28, 2017)

Civil Rights/Costs:  Trial Judge Properly Granted Losing Plaintiff’s Motion To Tax Costs With Respect To Prevailing Defendant In Case Involving FEHA/Non-FEHA Claims

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs

$68,382.38 In Costs Not Allowed To Defense Is The Upshot.             In Smith v. Sharp Healthcare, Case No. D069206 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 22, 2017) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a case with both FEHA and non-FEHA claims, with the defense filing a costs memorandum seeking $68,382.38 after plaintiff rejected a CCP § 998 offer of

Civil Rights:  Plaintiff Obtaining One Special Verdict Favorable Response But Losing Based On Other Responses Was Not Entitled To FEHA Fee Recovery

Cases: Civil Rights

Plaintiff Did Not Prevail On His Monetary Claims, And No Injunction/Declaratory Relief Found Against Defendants.              After obtaining a jury’s favorable answer to whether plaintiff’s physical condition was a substantial motivating reason for his termination, the jurors found against plaintiff on whether the conduct was a substantial factor in causing harm to plaintiff.  Plaintiff then

Civil Rights:  Prevailing Defense On Unruh Act/Disabled Persons Act Claims Seeking Injunction In Complaint Prayer Properly Granted $29,600 In Attorney’s Fees  

Cases: Civil Rights

Appellant Failed To Raise The Winning Argument For Reversal.             Horsley v. Tourmaline Real Estate Partners, LLC, Case No. B277926 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 19, 2017) (unpublished) is a lesson in being careful what you plead in your complaint prayer for relief, because it might trigger a bilateral fee-shifting statute.              Plaintiff pled for

Civil Rights/Employment:  FEHA Individual Supervising Employee Defendant Still Must Meet Frivolousness Standard For Purposes Of Obtaining FEHA Fee Shifting Award

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Employment

Employer Standard Also Applies To Supervising Employee Defendant.             In Lopez v. Routt, Case No. B269345 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 29, 2017) (published), the Second District, Division 3 DCA decided that a supervising employee FEHA defendant had to meet the same frivolousness standard as applicable to employer defendant with respect to recovering fees from

Civil Rights/Multiplier:  2.0 Multiplier Fee Award In FEHA Case Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Multipliers

Compensatory Award Was $1 Million, With $1,945,295 FEHA Award Affirmed On Appeal.             In Lopez v. City of Beverly Hills, Case No. B268451 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 30, 2017 unpublished; received for posting Dec. 1, 2017 unpublished), a FEHA plaintiff—after two years of litigation and a 10-day jury trial involving 24 witnesses–won to the

Civil Rights:  $575,231 Bane Act Compensatory Jury Verdict Resulted In Sustained Fees/Costs Award Of $2,027,612.75 By Trial Court

Cases: Civil Rights

Statutory Fee-Shifting Provisions Can Have Real Force In A Case For A Prevailing Party, Even If The Compensatory Damages Award Is Much Less Than Requested Fees.            Federal Theatre.  1936.  Library of Congress         The Bane Act, Civil Code section 52.1, is a broadly-worded California civil rights statute first enacted to combat

Civil Rights, Lodestar, Multiplier, Reasonableness Of Fees:  Trial Judge Properly Cut Lodestar By 25%, And Applied A 1.5 Positive Multiplier, For Total Fee Award Of $752,925.92 In Case Garnering Compensatory Damages Of $625,000 To Plaintiff

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Trial Judge Also Properly Awarded $15,000 Supplemental Fees For Posttrial Work.             For those of you not practicing in the employment/FEHA area, civil rights plaintiffs in disability/harassment/failure to accommodate cases are entitled to recovery of attorney’s fees under a pro-plaintiff statutory fee-shifting provision to be construed liberally to allow plaintiff full compensation for prevailing in

Civil Rights:  FEHA/Whistleblower Losing Plaintiff Properly Exposed To $94,017.50 In Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Civil Rights

Lack of Proof/Causation, And Some Crazy Assertions, Cemented Appellate Court’s Agreement With Trial Court’s Ruling.   Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace practices his favorite hobby, boomerang throwing.  July 13, 1939.  Library of Congress.             Baker v. Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Case No. B270973 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 25, 2017) (unpublished)

Scroll to Top