Tangible Benefit Was Produced—San Diego Police Department Encouraged to Train Officers to Avoid Excessive Force. The next decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is interesting. Though finding that the district judge got the law right, the majority in the decision still found that there was an abuse of discretion in refusing to […]
Conclusion of a Civil Rights Case Ends Well For Plaintiff. In our October 12, 2008 post, we reported on Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick’s win of substantial damages of almost $5 million against Orange County and other defendants in a civil rights case. She was also awarded attorney’s fees of $1.6 million. Defendants (primarily Orange
Ninth Circuit Disagrees with Seventh Circuit Over Fee Recovery for Compliance Activities and Also Reject That Laffey Matrix Had to Be Used in Determining Reasonable Hourly Rates. Prison Legal News v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. 09-15006 (9th Cir. June 9, 2010) (for publication) is an interesting Ninth Circuit decision regarding what fees are awardable under
Preemption Issue Between State and Federal Disability Schemes Under Consideration in Fee Shifting Area For the week of May 10, 2010, the California Supreme Court accepted review of Jankey v. Lee, No. S180890, a former First District, Division 4 decision which we reported on in our February 6, 2010 post (formerly published at 181
Title VII Claims Do Not Have To Be Asserted in Federal Case Seeking Only Fees. In Porter v. Winter, Case No. 07-17120 (9th Cir. May 5, 2010) (for publication), the Ninth Circuit determined that federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction over claims brought solely by a prevailing plaintiff to recover attorney’s fees incurred in
Lodestar Should Capture the Usual Fee Recovery; Federal Judges Must Provide a Reasonably Specific Explanation for All Aspects of a Fee Determination. At least in the area of federal civil rights cases (although the opinion may have broader applicability), the U.S. Supreme Court has issued an important decision relating to fee enhancements in Perdue v.
Plaintiff Does Not Convince Appellate Court to Award More, With Fourth District, Division Commenting on Some “Cutting Edge” Substantive Questions. Although the next case could be viewed as just a simple abuse of discretion case, it actually discusses some interesting tensions between federal and state cases on the specificity of reasoning that must be
Second District, Division 4 Found No Error In Severely Reducing Lodestar And Not Applying a Multiplier. After plaintiff settled with several defendants for $100,000 on FEHA claims, the trial court then had to determine the fee recovery to plaintiff’s counsel. Three attorneys requested a total of $564,344.38 in fees (based on a 1.5 multiplier)
Fourth District, Division 3 Affirms Fee/Costs Award Based on Retaliation Jury Verdict Against City of Anaheim. In our category “Civil Rights,” we have surveyed many FEHA fee/costs awards because the statute is pro-plaintiff oriented. Here is one where there were both FEHA and non-FEHA claims, but no allocation was necessary because the claims
Goodman Forecast to Curtain Attorney’s Fees In a March 15, 2010 article “Curtailing Attorneys’ Fees” by Harry I. Price (a Los Altos real estate attorney) published in The Recorder, Mr. Price predicts that Goodman v. Lozano—a recent California Supreme Court decision examined in our February 5, 2010 post—“will change how litigants sift and
