Tri-City Healthcare District Ordered to Pay $29,000 in Fees for Partially Successful SLAPP Motion by Director Kathleen Sterling.
As reported by Nathan Scharn in a December 23, 2011 post at SignOnSanDiego.com, Tri-City Healthcare District has been ordered to pay $29,000 to director Kathleen Sterling for her partially successful SLAPP motion against claims in a Tri-City lawsuit involving certain incidents at a board meeting. Ms. Sterling’s attorneys had sought $65,000 in fees (based on a multiplier), but San Diego County Superior Court Judge Earl H. Maas, III apparently did not award a multiplier and reduced some requested “fees on fees” (fees spent requesting fees as the SLAPP winner). He did approve an hourly rate averaging about $383.94.
Lehman Bros. Bankruptcy Fees Incurred Top $1.5 Billion To Date.
Bloomberg.com/news, in a December 28, 2011 post, informs us that Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. has spent about $1.5 billion in attorney’s fees relating to its bankruptcy proceeding. It already has paid almost half a billion dollars in fees to the restructuring firm of Alvarez & Marsal LLC during the reorganization efforts.
Capistrano Unified School District Must Pay Fees to Autistic Child’s Parents Under IDEA.
Penny Arevalo, in a December 22, 2011 post at RanchoSantaMargaritaPatch, lets us know that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed an adverse fee award against Capistrano Unified School District arising under the discretionary fee-shifting provision of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The district judge correctly concluded that autistic child’s parents prevailed when an administrative law judge found that the school district failed to provide a free and appropriate education between a January-June 2005 time frame, although parents lost claims for other time periods. The case is L.M. v. Capistrano Unified School Dist., Case No. 10-56243 (9th Cir. Dec. 21, 2011) (not for publication).
$148,250 Civil Rights Fee Award Sustained by Ninth Circuit Against Fontana.
In McCown v. City of Fontana, Case No. 10-55672 (9th Cir. Dec. 27, 2011) (not for publication) (which we have blogged on in the past, see our April 25, 2009 post), prevailing civil rights plaintiff finally got what he wanted– substantial fees and costs awards. Earlier, the Ninth Circuit had reversed a $200,000 fee award as unreasonable based on the $20,000 settlement with plaintiff (565 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2009).) However, Fontana governmental entities/police officers continued to litigate, even though plaintiff was willing to settle for the $20,000 plus a redetermination of reasonable fees. This continued litigation eventually resulted in the Fontana parties’ acceptance of the settlement agreed to a year earlier by plaintiff, who also won a summary judgment proceeding in the process. These subsequent developments led the Ninth Circuit to conclude the district judge’s subsequent award of $148,250 in fees and $15,034.10 in costs were reasonable–after all, this was only half the fee request and $51,750 less than the original fee award despite the occurrence of another year of litigation. Fee/costs awards affirmed.