Cases: Civil Rights – Page 35 – Cal Attorneys Fees

Unruh Act: Attorney’s Fees Denied To Losing Plaintiffs In Unsuccessful Challenge to Angels’ “Mother’s Day Totebag” Giveaway

November 28, 2008

Fourth District, Division Three Finds Plaintiffs Were Not Catalysts For Change So As To Be Entitled to Fees. Our fellow blawg “Cal Biz Lit” has an interesting post on November 21, 2008, discussing our local Fourth District, Division Three’s unpublished opinion in Cohn v. Corinthian Colleges, Inc., Case No. G038388 (4th Dist., Div. 3

FEHA Prevailing Defendants: Do Not Despair—Proper Record Means That You Can Recoup Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Civil Rights

November 4, 2008

Second District, Division Three Awards Fee to the Defense Where Plaintiff’s Case Found Objectively Baseless in Nature. Winning FEHA defendants, take solace. Up to this point, we have mainly reported on cases where losing plaintiffs have avoided paying attorney’s fees in cases involving Fair Employment Housing Act (FEHA) claims for discrimination. The overriding reason

Reversal Has Its Price: Substantial Attorney’s Fees Award Falls When Court of Appeal Overturns Unruh Act Merits Judgment

Cases: Civil Rights

October 30, 2008

First District’s Reversal Wipes Out $1,969,000 Fee Award to Plaintiffs. Reversal of a merits judgment has a legal tsunami effect—it can also wipe out a substantial fee award to the ex-prevailing party. That is what happened in the next case we review. In Turner v. Assn. of American Med. Colleges, Case No. A117071

FEHA Fee Awards: Third District Holds That Written Statement Of Findings Required Where Defendants Are Awarded Fees

Cases: Civil Rights

October 22, 2008

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

Orange County Ordered To Pay $1.6 Million In Attorney’s Fees To Winning Civil Rights Plaintiff In High Profile Case Against Orange County Social Services

Cases: Civil Rights

October 12, 2008

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

Proofread Your Work: Submission of Subpar Written Papers Or Sloppy Work Product Can Lead To A Reduction In Fees

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

October 12, 2008

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

Two Winning Civil Rights Plaintiffs’ $421,357 Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Standard of Review

October 11, 2008

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

Recent Title IX Suit Settlement Demonstrates How Fee-Shifting Statute Impacts The Structure of A Compromise

Cases: Civil Rights

September 30, 2008

$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

FEHA Prevailing Plaintiff, Who Prevailed On One Out of Three Claims, Awarded Substantial Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Civil Rights

September 21, 2008

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

Plaintiff’s Attempted Vindication Of His Own Rights After Employment Termination Did Not Entitle Him To Recoup Fees Under Either The Civil Rights Fee-Shifting Provision Or The Private Attorney General Statute

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Standard of Review

September 16, 2008

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