Third District Reads Cummings As Mandating Written Findings of Meritlessness in Awarding Fees to the Defense in FEHA Actions. In past posts of August 1, August 10, and September 21, 2008, we have reviewed decisions which have followed Cummings v. Benco Building Services, 11 Cal.App.4th 1383, 1386-1388 (1992) in FEHA actions, especially for the […]
Judge Bauer Awards Fees After $4.9 Million Jury Verdict and Issuance of Permanent Injunction. Plaintiff Deanna Hardwick-Fogarty brought a civil rights action against Orange County Social Services and several of its social workers. (Fogarty-Hardwick v. County of Orange, Orange County Super. Ct. Case No. 01CC02379, filed in 2001). The suit arose from plaintiff’s allegations
Transylvania Feral Court Slashes Attorney’s Fees Award Drastically For Spoor Work Product. Although we usually confine our posts to California-oriented cases, settlements, or fee issues, the following fee reduction ruling by a Philadelphia-based federal district judge was too good to pass up and also offers some sobering lessons to practitioners seeking fee awards when
Court of Appeal Sustains $336,800 Lodestar Plus 0.25 Multiplier. Two high school freshmen sued the Poway School District, a principal, and an assistant principal, alleging various federal and state civil rights violations arising out of failure to quell peer sexual orientation harassment of an anti-gay nature. Following a jury trial, the two plaintiffs were
$450,000 of the Settlement Was For Reimbursement of Attorney’s Fees. Title IX is one of the federal fee-shifting attorney’s fees statutes that encourages litigants to confront various forms of discrimination. It does play a role in settlements, as we next discuss in connection with a recent compromise reached between a California
Second District, Division One Sustains Fee Award Based on Plaintiff’s Success in a Jury Trial. In our August 10, 2008 post, we discussed the unpublished decision of Naidu v. Cal. Pub. Util. Comm’n. That case relied extensively on Cummings v. Benco Building Services, 11 Cal.App.4th 1383, 1387 (1992), which held that
Second District, Division Two So Rules in Case Where Ex-Police Officer Did Not Prove a Civil Rights Violation and Never Obtained Reinstatement of His Former Position in the Police Department. Plaintiff, an ex-police officer in the City of Torrance, was terminated based on a domestic violence incident resulting in his conviction
Second District, Division Eight So Rules in Case Involving Non-Court Ordered Expert Witness Fees. Government Code section 12965(b) specifies that, in retaliation claims under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), “the court, in its discretion, may award to the prevailing party reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, including expert witness fees
Second District, Division One Affirms and Reverses Portions of Fee Award Under Contractual Provision and Discretionary Fee-Shifting Statutes. By now, it should be apparent that there are stark differences in how some fee-shifting statutes operate. Civil Code section 1717 mandates an award to a "prevailing party" under a contractual fees clause,
Court of Appeal Sustains Reductions by Trial Court and Suggests That Fees Expended by the Opposition Has Probative Value in Fee Proceedings. In Horsford v. Board of Trustees of California State University (Horsford I), 132 Cal.App.4th 359, 402 (2005), the Fifth District Court of Appeal determined a trial court had applied
