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 In Lopez v. City of Beverly Hills, Case No. B268451 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 30, 2017 unpublished; received for posting Dec. 1, 2017 unpublished), a FEHA plaintiff—after two years of litigation and a 10-day jury trial involving 24 witnesses–won to the […]
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
District Judge Confronts Multiple Issues In Reaching Fee Award. U.S. District Judge Susan Ilston in Ridgeway v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. 08-cv-05221-SI (N.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2017 Doc. #606) confronted numerous issues in deciding the appropriate award to class counsel in a truck driver employee class action case against Wal-Mart for wage hour
Class Counsel Appealed, But To No Avail Except On Two Minor Issues. Woosley v. State of California, Case No. B261454 (2d Dist., Div. 5 April 24, 2017) (unpublished) was a dispute which spanned close to 40 years, with the parties then hassling over attorney’s fees over the last dozen years. (Kinda
Case Tells Government Entities To Beware When They Aggressively Litigate And Lose In Pro-Civil Rights Fee Shifting Cases. The next case is one that litigators representing governmental entities need to pay attention to. Often times, government will aggressively litigate until the end, only to tell the appellate court that fees to a successful
Plaintiff Requested $212,287.50 (Inclusive Of A 1.5 Multiplier), But Lower Court’s Award Of A Reasonable Lodestar Was No Abuse of Discretion. Plaintiff employee eventually obtained recovery of $43,654.50 in an unpaid commission dispute even though he at one point was willing to accept $75,000 to settle which included a $30,000 component to reimburse
1.25 Multiplier Sustained; Reversal of One Intertwined Retaliation Claim Did Not Require Reconsideration Of Fee Award. William A. Offutt, winner of adding machine operators contest, 1937. Library of Congress. In Warehime v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, Case No. F068843 (5th Dist. Dec. 15, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiff brought a four-count FEHA inspired suit against Farmers,
Dartmouth Football Team, 1901. 1.7 Multiplier Awarded By N.D. Cal. District Judge. On December 10, 2015, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilkens of the Northern District of California awarded lead plaintiffs’ counsel almost $12 million in fees for work leading to the settlements in a class action case brought by student athletes
Need For More Expensive Out-Of-Venue Counsel Was Well Justified By Fee Claimant. In Habitat and Watershed Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz, Case No. H040762 (6th Dist. Oct. 6, 2015) (unpublished), both plaintiff and City appealed a lower court’s decision awarding plaintiff fees of about $250,000 (out of a requested $486,800 on the
Out-of-Town Counsel Use/High Hourly Rates And Positive Multiplier Enhancement Dominate Discussion In Lengthy Unpublished Decision From Riverside DCA. Although this case should be of interest to civil rights practitioners on the merits (discussing various evidentiary and instructional error issues), Ruelas v. Harper, Case No. E051961 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 6, 2015) (unpublished)
