Cases: Civil Rights

Civil Rights, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Website Accessibility Plaintiff’s Award Of $95,295.67 In Attorneys’ Fees And Costs, Under Civil Code Sections 51 And 52, Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Defendant Could Not Renege On Joint Stipulation Wherein It Agreed That It Would Not Dispute Liability, And Would Not Dispute Plaintiff’s Entitlement To Fees/Costs Under Civil Code Sections 51 And 52.             In Gutierrez v. Chopard, Case No. B309098 (2d Dist., Div. 5 August 19, 2022) (published), plaintiff, who is legally blind, filed a complaint […]

Civil Rights: EAJA Attorney’s Fees Were Properly Denied In Immigration Matter Where It Took A Ninth Circuit En Banc Panel To Decide, Over The Vote Of Three Dissenting Justices, On The Ultimate Merits Issue.

Cases: Civil Rights

Novelty And First Impression Of The Issue Showed That The Government’s Position Was Substantially Justified For EAJA Purposes.             In Medina Tovar v. Zuchowski, No. 21-35664 (9th Cir. July 21, 2022) (published), plaintiffs invalidated a regulation limiting derivative U-visas to spouses married at the time of the filing of the principal petition.  Plaintiffs moved for

Civil Rights, Landlord/Tenant: Frivolous FEHA Case By Plaintiffs In Rental Dispute Justified $228,123.77 Attorney’s Fees, Expert Fees, And Costs Award In Favor Of Prevailing Defendant Owner

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Landlord/Tenant

No Abuse Of Discretion Shown, With Prior Denial Of Summary Judgment Not Disqualifying Owner From Award Of FEHA Fees Under The Right Circumstances.             FEHA has a pro-plaintiff fee shifting statute; however, under the right circumstances, a prevailing defendant can obtain fee shifting against a plaintiff where the case is shown to be frivolous in

Civil Rights, Default Judgments: Ninth Circuit Reverses District Judge’s Entry Of ADA Fees Pursuant To Local Schedule For Default Judgments Rather Than Entertain Fee Motion Requesting Lodestar Fees Where Plaintiff Opted For The Non-Fee Schedule Option

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Default Judgments

This Was A 2-1 Decision, With The Dissent Indicating Plaintiff Did Not Properly Tee This Issue Up Before The District Judge.             The Ninth Circuit, in the 2-1 decision of Machowski v. 333 N. Placentia Property, LLC, No. 21-55673 (9th Cir. July 1, 2022) (published), decided that where an ADA plaintiff indicates that the litigant

Civil Rights, Costs: Costs Relating To Non-FEHA Claims Affirmed, But Remand To Determine If Some Costs Were Justified Because FEHA Claim Was Frivolous

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs

Lack Of Trial Court Findings Required A Limited Remand On Possible FEHA Costs.             In a FEHA/non-FEHA mixed case, routine costs that true non-FEHA claim costs are recoverable but that overlapping FEHA/non-FEHA claim costs which cannot be apportioned can only be recovered if the FEHA claim was frivolous.  (Roman v. BRE Properties, Inc. (2015) 237

Fees, Civil Rights, Employment: USDC Central District Judge Awards Full Freight Fee Award In Waiting-Time Penalties Case

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Employment, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Record

Judge Finds That Fee Award Of $342,782.50 Is Reasonable In Waiting-Time Penalties Case.         On June 17, 2022, the Hon. R. Gary Klausner issued a fee award to the prevailing plaintiff in a waiting-time penalties case. Caley Rae Pavillard v. Ignite International, Ltd. et al., USDC Central District No. 2:21-cv-01306-RGK-Ex.        

Civil Rights: Civil Rights Plaintiff Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees For Just Defeating A Defense Qualified Immunity Motion Were The Case Was Proceeding To Trial

Cases: Civil Rights

Prevailing Party Can Only Be Determined After A Trial On The Merits.             In Senn v. Smith, Case No. 21-35293 (9th Cir. June 8, 2022) (published), plaintiff brought an excessive force 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against certain defendants, obtaining a denial of the defense motion for qualified immunity—a determination affirmed on appeal.  Plaintiff moved

Civil Rights: Trial Court’s 75% Reduction Of FEHA Attorney’s Fees, After Specific Entry Reductions, Was Reversed Because Limited Success Analysis Was Flawed

Cases: Civil Rights

Evidence On Unsuccessful Claims Was Probative On Successful Claims, So Reduction Needed To Be Restudied.              In Vines v. O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, Case No. B301000 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Jan. 21, 2022) (published), a FEHA plaintiff won on two out of six causes of action, recovering $140,400 on retaliation/failure to prevent retaliation claims, but

Arbitration, Civil Rights, Employment: Employee’s Petition For Writ Of Mandate Granted Where Employer Was Awarded $6,912 In Attorney Fees For Successfully Bringing Motion To Compel Arbitration Of FEHA Claims

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Employment

Based On The Standards Set Forth For Imposition Of Fees Under FEHA, Employer’s Arbitration Agreement Did Not Authorize Recovery Of Attorney Fees Absent A Finding That Employee’s Opposition To Motion To Compel Arbitration Was Groundless.             California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.) provides that a prevailing FEHA defendant

Civil Rights, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: $1,113,750 In FEHA Attorney’s Fees In Racial Discrimination/Retaliation Case Garnering $450,001 Compensatory Award To Successful Plaintiff Was No Abuse Of Discretion

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

Hourly Rate, Lodestar, And Multiplier Conclusions Were Not Beyond Reason.             Plaintiff in Sterling v. County of Sacramento, Case No. C089616 (3d Dist. Sept. 7, 2021) (unpublished) won $450,001 in compensatory damages under FEHA racial discrimination/retaliation claims.  Plaintiff then moved for over $1.515 million in fees (lodestar plus a positive 2 multiplier enhancement).  The lower

Scroll to Top