AELE LAW LIBRARY OF CASE SUMMARIES:
Corrections Law for
Jails, Prisons and Detention Facilities
Back to list of subjects Back to Legal Publications Menu
Attorney's Fees
Monthly Law Journal Article: Attorneys' Fees in Prisoners' Civil Rights Lawsuits, 2016 (1) AELE Mo. L. J. 301.
A federal appeals court overturned the denial of an award of attorneys’ fees in a disability discrimination lawsuit brought by a prisoner under the Americans with Disabilities Act, (ADA). While the trial court correctly determined that Farrar v. Hobby, #91-990, 506 U.S. 103 (1992), provided the relevant legal framework for such an award, the appeals court ruled that the trial court was in the best position to determine whether this lawsuit achieved a “compensable public goal” justifying a fee award, despite a recovery limited to only nominal damages. The plaintiff argued that this was an unusual case justifying a fee award despite the limited damages because the litigation secured an American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter for the prisoner, achieved recognition of the rights of deaf probationers and prisoners to disability accommodations, deterred future ADA violations, and prompted necessary reforms in the defendants’ policies toward deaf individuals. Therefore, the court remanded for further proceedings on the attorneys’ fee issue Shelton v. Louisiana State, #18-30349, 919 F.3d 325 (8th Cir. 2019).
A
Massachusetts prisoner was awarded $28,578.69 in attorney's fees and costs as a
prevailing plaintiff under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988 after he sued claiming that
prison officials violated his constitutional due process rights by holding him
in essentially solitary confinement in a special management unit (SMU) for ten
months, without a hearing, while waiting to transfer or reclassify him. That
resulted in a decision in Massachusetts “for the first time that
segregated confinement on awaiting action status for longer than ninety days
gives rise to a liberty interest entitling an inmate to notice and a
hearing,” and a written post-hearing decision. The highest court in
Massachusetts upheld the attorneys’ fee award although the plaintiff was
discharged from the SMU detention long before relief in his favor was granted,
as he qualified as a "prevailing party” because the declaratory
judgment granted was not moot when entered, as the deprivation of civil rights
was capable of repetition against him, and the inmate directly benefited from
the judgment when it was entered. LaChance v. Commissioner of Correction,
#SJC-12016, 475 Mass. 757, 2016 Mass. Lexis 767, 60 N.E.3d 1157.
Both
federal and state courts hearing federal civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1983 have discretion to award a prevailing party (other than the federal
government) reasonable attorneys' fees under 2 U.S.C. Sec. 1988. The U.S.
Supreme Court, however, has restricted such awards to prevailing defendants
only to cases in which the plaintiff's lawsuit was "frivolous,
unreasonable, or without foundation." The Idaho Supreme Court held that it
was not bound by that interpretation of the law and made a Sec.1988 award of
attorneys' fees to a prevailing defendant in a Sec. 1983 lawsuit without first
deciding whether the plaintiff's claim was "frivolous, unreasonable, or
without foundation." The U.S. Supreme Court reversed. Sec. 1988 is a
federal statute, so the Supreme Court's interpretation is final and binding on
all courts, federal or state. James v.
Boise, #15-493, 136 S. Ct. 685, 2016 U.S. Lexis 947.
In Wilkins v. Gaddy,
#08-10914, 559 U.S. 34 (2010), the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the argument
that a prisoner, to impose liability on a correctional officer for excessive
use of force, must show more than a "de minimus" (minimal) injury. On
remand, the prisoner was awarded $0.99 in damages by the jury, which was
rounded up to $1. The trial court awarded attorneys' fees limited to $1.40,
based on the limit of attorneys' fees in the Prison Litigation Reform Act of no
more than 150% of the money damages awarded, rather than the over $92,000 in
attorneys' fees requested. A federal appeals court has rejected an argument
that this limitation on attorneys' fees was unconstitutional. The court applied
rational basis scrutiny and that Congress could have believed that this limit
would help deter frivolous, marginal and trivial claims. Wilkins v. Gaddy,
#12-8148, 2013 U.S. App. Lexis 22389 (4th Cir.).
A prisoner was awarded $1,500 in compensatory and
punitive damages against a prison employee in a lawsuit over alleged
interference with his needed dental treatment. After the prisoner successfully
defended the judgment on appeal, he moved for an award of $16,800 in attorneys'
fees. The employee claimed that he only should have to pay, at most, attorneys'
fees of up to 150% of the amount of damages awarded (or $2,250), because of a cap
on attorneys' fees in the Prison Litigation Reform Act. A federal appeals court
rejected this argument, holding that the cap only applies to fees awarded for
obtaining the award in the trial court and did not limit the amount of fees
that could be awarded after successfully defending such a judgment on appeal.
Further proceedings will determine the exact amount of fees to be awarded, but
the cap will not apply to the fees for work done on the appeal. Woods v. Carey,
#09-16113, 2013 U.S. App. Lexis 14430 (9th Cir.).
The trial court awarded $505,671.40 in attorneys'
fees and $24,549.94 in costs, ordering the plaintiff to pay $5,000 of the fee
award. The court ordered that all four defendants bee jointly and severally
liable for the remaining $500,671.40, to ensure that the attorneys' fees were
paid. This action was taken, in part, because the county indicated that it
might not indemnify the defendant against whom the largest award was made
because he was in prison and thought to be judgment-proof. An appeal of the
judgment on liability was affirmed, Jimenez v. Franklin, #07-56149, 333 Fed.
Appx. 299, 2009 U.S. App. Lexis 21564 (Unpub. 9th Cir.) but that appeal did not
raise the issue of joint and several liability for the attorneys' fees. An
additional $41,830.10 in fees were awarded for that appeal, bringing the fee
award to $547,501.50, or 150% of the total damage award, the fee limit under
the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(d)(2). The county did
not pay $225,000 of the attorneys' fee award. A federal appeals
court rejected an argument by the deputy found liable for $1 that he could not
be held jointly and severally liable for the unpaid fees because of the
statute's attorneys' fee cap of 150% of damages, as he had not raised the issue
in the earlier appeal. Jimenez v. Franklin, #10-56199, 2012 U.S. App.
Lexis 10260 (9th Cir.).
Prisoners in Idaho who sued over the issue of
prison overcrowding 25 years ago obtained injunctive relief. Their attorneys
went back to court recently to argue that the defendants should be held in
contempt for failing to comply with the relief granted, but the problem was
corrected in the meantime, so no contempt order was issued. Attorneys' fees
were still awarded to the lawyers, however, as their motion was the
"catalyst" for the state to remedy the violations. The appeals court
upheld the award of $76,185.60 in attorneys' fees, $12,249.20 in costs, and
$6.94 in postage and supplies as reasonable, and stated that the lawyers had
not "milked" the case just to run up fees. Balla v. State of Idaho,
#10-35413, 2012 U.S. App. Lexis 7644 (9th Cir.).
After a prisoner's negligence and emotional distress
claims against an Idaho county were found to be frivolous, the defendants were
awarded $13,172 in attorneys' fees and costs against the prisoner under state
law. The prisoner tried to avoid this award by filing a Chapter 7 bankruptcy
petition. A federal bankruptcy appellate panel ruled that the discharge granted
in the bankruptcy proceeding did not relieve him from having to pay. The award
constituted a debt arising out of a "fine, penalty, or forfeiture payable
to and for the benefit of a governmental unit," which cannot be discharged
through bankruptcy. Searcy v. ADA County Prosecuting Atty. Office (In re Searcy),
#09-00248, 2012 Bankr. Lexis 204 (B.A.P. 9th Cir.).
A Rastafarian prisoner claimed that a corrections
officer violated his religious rights by touching his dreadlock hair without
permission. While the jury held in favor of the prisoner, they only awarded
nominal damages of $1. Under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(d)(2) of the Prison
Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), the court's award of attorney's fees to the
prevailing plaintiff were limited to 150% of the damage award, or $1.50. The
appeals court noted that Congress, in granting a statutory right for prevailing
plaintiffs in federal civil rights lawsuits to be granted attorneys' fees,
departed from the normal rule in U.S. courts that litigants all pay their own
attorneys' fees. It was accordingly also free to put a cap on such fees in
cases brought by prisoners. Shepherd v. Goord, #10-4821, 2011 U.S. App.
Lexis 22928 (2nd Cir.).
Prisoners who prevailed in a settlement of a
lawsuit over prison conditions, specifically dental care, were entitled to an
award of attorneys' fees and paralegal fees under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988, and they
were limited by the Prison Litigation Reform Act to 150% of the hourly rate
established for court appointed counsel under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3006A. The court
held that the same cap applicable to attorneys' fees applies to separately
billed paralegal fees. It therefore upheld a trial court order requiring the
defendants to pay the plaintiffs' paralegal expenses at a rate of $169.50 per
hour, rather than the $82.50 per hour prison officials had argued they should
pay. Perez v. Cate, #09-17185, 2011 U.S. App. Lexis 643 (9th Cir.).
After a Muslim prisoner was granted relief
in his lawsuit seeking to have prison officials provide him with kosher meals,
the trial court awarded him $73,360.20 in attorneys' fees and 271.20 in costs.
A federal appeals court ruled that 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988, regarding the award of
attorneys' fees, did not preempt a Nebraska state statute requiring, for
payment of such awards, submission to a state claims procedure, followed by
submission to the state legislature for possible appropriation. The appeals
court also found that the fee award failed to deduct time spent on unsuccessful
claims in the lawsuit and that the plaintiff's attorney spent an
"unreasonable" amount of time on the claims on which he did achieve
success. As the requested attorneys' fee award was disproportionate to the
relief obtained, further proceedings were required. El-Tabech v. Clarke,
#09-1554, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 16972 (8th Cir.).
A newspaper that reports on prison legal issues claimed
that California prison officials violated its First Amendment rights by
refusing to deliver its publications to some prisoners, and by refusing to
deliver certain hardcover books that the publisher wished to send to prisoners.
The parties reached a settlement agreement which included delivery of the
publications to prisoners, and the payment of $65,100 in damages. Ultimately
$458,000 in attorneys' fees and costs were also paid by the state. A federal
appeals court has now upheld a trial court award of an additional $137,502.46
in attorneys' fees and costs for work done monitoring the state's compliance
with the settlement agreement, including corresponding with inmates. Prison
Legal News v. Schwarzenegger, #09-15006, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 11690 (9th Cir.).
A California state prisoner claimed that prison
grooming regulations violated his right to religious freedom. While the trial
court initially issued a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the
regulations, ultimately it dismissed the prisoner's claims for lack of
jurisdiction. It then nevertheless awarded the plaintiff prisoner attorneys'
fees. A federal appeals court ruled that the attorneys' fee award was erroneous
when the trial court never found an actual violation of the prisoner's rights.
Kimbrough v. State of Cal.; #08-17231, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 13039 (9th Cir.).
Current and former detainees in a county jail
claimed that the county had an unconstitutional policy of stripsearching every
detainee without reasonable suspicion and regardless of the offense they were
charged with. A $2.5 million settlement was reached in their class action
lawsuit, but the trial judge awarded the detainees counsel less than the
requested amount of attorneys' fees from the settlement. A federal appeals
court approved this result, finding that the trial court did not abuse its
discretion in determining that use of counsel's normal hourly rates for their
time adequately compensated them, rather than awarding a percentage of the
settlement, or using a multiplier on the normal hourly rate. While $650,000 in
attorneys' fees (26% of the settlement) was requested, the court approved
attorneys' fees and costs of $460, 796.50 (of which $344,795 were fees).
McDaniel v. County of Schenectady, #07-5580, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 2922 (2nd
Cir.).
A Nebraska prisoner attempted to send drawings of
a marijuana leaf and a bare-breasted woman to his mother and to a communist
group, the "Maoist Internationalist Movement." When prison officials
prevented him from doing so, he sued, claiming a violation of his First
Amendment rights. The trial court directed a verdict in the prisoner's favor,
awarded him nominal damages of $1, and ordered two defendants to pay
approximately $25,000 in attorneys' fees. The appeals court rejected the
defendants' defenses of failure to exhaust available administrative remedies
and mootness as not properly preserved for appeal. It also upheld a
determination that the prisoner, since he was awarded nominal damages, was a
prevailing plaintiff, entitled to an award of attorneys' fees. But the appeals
court also held that 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(d)(2) of the Prison Litigation Reform
Act limited the award of attorneys fees to 150% of the damages awarded, or $1.50,
since no injunctive or declaratory relief was awarded. Keup v. Hopkins,
#09-1079, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 4538 (8th Cir.).
Muslim inmates complained that they were only
provided with Halal meat, produced in accordance with the requirements of their
religion, twice a year, while Jewish prisoners received kosher meat four to
five times a week. Prison officials agreed to provide Halal meat with the same
frequency in exchange for the dismissal of the lawsuit, which the trial court
approved. A federal appeals court ruled that the prisoners were prevailing
parties, entitled to an award of attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988,
since they accomplished a "material alteration" on the complained of
issue, and that the caps on attorneys' fees in the Prison Litigation Reform
Act, 42 U.S.C. 1997e(d), applied to the case despite the fact that some of the
plaintiffs were released from prison after they filed the lawsuit, but before
it was settled. Fees of $99,658.48 were awarded. On remand, the trial court was
instructed to determine a reasonable attorneys' fee award for the time spent on
the appeal. Perez v. Westchester Cty. Dep't of Corr., #08-4245, 2009 U.S. App.
Lexis 25396 (2nd Cir.).
After a jury awarded a prisoner $17,500 in
damages on a federal civil rights claim against a prison guard, the trial court
awarded him $26,250 in attorneys' fees. The appeals court upheld the attorneys'
fee caps in the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(d),
rejecting an argument that they denied prisoners equal protection of the law as
compared to non-incarcerated persons. Parker v. Conway, #08-2764, 2009 U.S.
App. Lexis 20723 (3rd Cir.).
Limitations on attorneys' fee awards contained in
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e of the Prison Litigation Reform Act are constitutional
because they are based on legitimate governmental objectives, including
achieving uniformity in such awards. Parker v. Conway, #08-2764, 2009 U.S. App.
Lexis 20723 (3rd Cir.).
A federal court jury awarded $1 to a plaintiff
Muslim immigration detainee on claims that her rights to religious freedom were
violated, as well as $100,000 on state law negligent hiring, training,
supervision, and retention claims. A federal appeals court found that the trial
court, in awarding $642,398.57 in attorneys' fees to the plaintiff, erroneously
assumed that 33% to 50% of the state law damage award was intended as
compensation for the plaintiff's federal religious freedom claim. A
recalculation was ordered of the proper amount of attorneys' fees to be
awarded. Jama v. Esmor Correctional Services, Inc., #08-2500, 2009 U.S. App.
Lexis 17950 (3rd Cir.).
After an 18-year-old female detainee at a
Wisconsin prison for women managed to commit suicide despite being placed on
24-hour-a-day suicide watch, her estate and minor sisters sued a number of
correctional employees for failure to prevent the death, seeking a total of $10
million in damages. After years of litigation, the plaintiffs accepted a
settlement offer of $635,000, not including attorneys' fees. The plaintiffs
then sought $328,740.42 in attorneys' fees. The trial judge reduced the
request, awarding $100,000 in attorneys' fees, stating that he was doing so
because the plaintiffs recovered only a "small fraction" of the
damages they originally sought. The appeals court found that this was an
improper approach, and stated that the fact that the plaintiffs initially
requested an "absurd" amount of damages should not be held against
them to reduce the attorneys' fee award, since they did obtain a "significant"
recovery. Further proceedings were ordered on the right amount of attorneys'
fees to award. Estate of Enoch v. Tienor, #08-4103, 2009 U.S. App. Lexis 13920
(7th Cir.).
A former detainee awarded $1 against a
corrections company and correctional officials on her claims for interference
with her right to exercise her religion under the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000bb, as well as $100,000 on related state law claims,
was a prevailing plaintiff entitled to an award of attorneys' fees under 42
U.S.C. Sec. 1983. A total of $642,398.57 in attorneys' fees and costs was
awarded. The court found that the results the plaintiff had achieved caused
both a change in the defendants' behavior, and benefits for the plaintiff. Jama
v. Esmor Correctional Services, Inc., Civ. No. 97-3093, 2008 U.S. Dist. Lexis
32943 (D.N.J.).
Federal appeals court rules that statute
restricting attorneys' fees awards in prisoner lawsuits to 150% of the damage
award applies to lawsuits filed by prisoners over incidents that occurred
before their incarceration. Plaintiff prisoner awarded $1 in nominal damages in
excessive force case was therefore only entitled to $1.50 in attorneys' fees,
rather than the $9,680 awarded by the trial judge. Court rejects the argument
that this result, following the "plain language" of the statute,
caused an "absurd" result. Robbins v. Chronister, No. 02-3115, 435
F.3d 1238 (10th Cir. 2006) [2006 JB Jun]
Federal trial court preliminarily approves $12
million settlement of class action lawsuit challenging D.C. Department of
Corrections policy of conducting suspicionless strip searches of detainees who
were ruled releasable after court appearances. Court also finds that attorneys'
fee award of one-third of the settlement fund, or $4 million, was reasonable.
Bynum v. D.C., No. CIV.A.02-956, 412 F. Supp. 2d 73 (D.D.C. 2006). [N/R]
Mother of youth murdered while in the custody of
a contractors for the District of Columbia Youth Services Administration, was
awarded $997,161 in compensatory and punitive damages on civil rights and
negligence claims. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant's failure to
monitor the youth's medication and whereabouts, to connect him with court
ordered mental health and substance abuse services, or to properly care for him
caused his death. Court rules that plaintiff was also entitled to an award of
$398,490.75 in attorneys' fees and $22,528.30 in costs. Court rejected argument
that it was unreasonable to spend 96 hours preparing opposition to the defendant's
motion for summary judgment, but did rule that a 25% reduction in requested
hourly rates was justified when the same evidence was presented on both the
civil rights and negligence claims and the requested attorneys' fee award would
otherwise have amounted to almost 54% of the damage award. Muldrow v.
Re-Direct, Inc., No. CIV. A. 01-2537, 397 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2005). [N/R]
Prisoner who was awarded $1 in nominal damages in
federal civil rights lawsuit against off-duty police officer who allegedly
violated his Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force in smashing the
window of his car with a baton during confrontation prior to his incarceration
was properly also awarded $9,680 in attorneys' fees and $915.16 in expenses by
trial court. Federal appeals court rules that provision of the Prison
Litigation Reform Act's which limits attorneys' fee awards in prisoner suits to
150% of the money judgment, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(d), did not apply to civil
rights claims that arose before the prisoner was incarcerated. Robbins v.
Chronister, No. 02-3115, 402 F.3d 1047 (10th Cir. 2005). [N/R]
Federal appeals court rules that maximum
allowable attorneys' fees, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, should be
based on 150% of the hourly rate authorized by the Judicial Conference of the
United States, not on 150% of the lower hourly rate actually paid to
court-appointed counsel under the Criminal Justice Act, which is based on the
amount actually appropriated by Congress. Hadix v. Johnson, No. 03-1068 2005
U.S. App. Lexis 3275 (6th Cir.). [2005 JB Apr]
Prisoner who prevailed on his claim that his
right of access to the courts was unconstitutionally interfered with by denial
of physical access to the prison's law library (allowing him only to request particular
materials be brought to him in his cell by providing their precise citation)
was entitled to an award of $99,981.43 in attorneys' fees and costs. Amount of
attorneys' fees award in case were not limited by the Prison Litigation Reform
Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(d)(1)(A) when a settlement agreement provided that
fees would be awarded under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988. LaPlante v. Pepe,
#01-10186-NG, 307 F. Supp. 2d 219 (D. Mass. 2004). [N/R]
Plaintiff who obtained injunctive and declaratory
relief in class action lawsuit claiming that correctional officials failed to
adequately train and supervise its employees, thereby subjecting prisoners to a
risk of assaults by other inmates, but who received no monetary relief was
entitled to an award of $427,158.73 in attorneys' fees and expenses. The
maximum hourly rate for the attorneys' in the case was limited, under the
Prison Litigation Reform Act, 1997e(d)(3) to 150% of the hourly fee for
appointed lawyers paid in the federal circuit where the lawsuit was brought,
rather than 150% of the rate established by the Judicial Conference. This
resulted in a maximum hourly fee of $135 per hour, rather than $169.50 per
hour, in this case. Court also rules that plaintiff's attorney was entitled to
a fee multiplier in the case because of "excellent work" enabling
case to be resolved through summary judgment and settlement, avoiding a costly
trial and saving defendant officials higher attorneys' fees and costs. Skinner
v. Uphoff, 324 F. Supp. 2d 1278 (D. Wyoming. 2004). [N/R]
While prisoner successfully proved that prison
security director improperly put him in segregation in retaliation for filing
"too many" complaints and grievances, in violation of his First
Amendment rights, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, he was not entitled
to an award of compensatory damages in the absence of physical injury, but only
$1 in nominal damages. Appeals court also upholds the decision not to award
punitive damages, since the defendant acted out of "frustration," rather
than with an "evil motive," and upholds application of PLRA section
to limit attorneys' fee award in the case to $1.50. Royal v. Kautzky, No.
02-3446, 375 F.3d 720 (8th Cir. 2004). [2004 JB Oct]
Prison Litigation Reform Act's cap on attorneys'
fees at 150% of damage award does not apply in cases where the parties
privately settle the lawsuit, and subsequently enter a stipulation of dismissal
of the claim in the trial court. Torres v. Walker, No. 03-102, 356 F.3d 238
(2nd Cir. 2004). [2004 JB Aug]
Prisoner awarded $1,000 against one of two
defendant correctional officers on his claim for excessive use of force against
him was also entitled to $1,500 in attorneys' fees as a prevailing party under
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(d) (2) limiting awards against defendants for attorneys'
fees to 150% of award for damages. Farella v. Hockaday, 304 F. Supp. 2d 1076
(C.D. Ill. 2004). [N/R]
Prison visitor who sought $9 million in damages
on multiple constitutional and state law claims over purported unlawful search
and arrest, and excessive use of force against him by correctional officers was
ultimately awarded only $2,501 in damages against one officer on a single claim
of excessive use of force. Trial judge reduces requested attorneys' fee award
and costs of over $140,000 to a total of $27,157.80, based on "unnecessary
prolonging," by plaintiff's attorney, of the duration and cost of the
case. Lynn v. State of Maryland, 295 F. Supp. 2d 594 (D. Md. 2003). [2004 JB
Apr]
Prisoner who was awarded compensatory
damages of $15,000 and punitive damages of $30,000 for alleged excessive force
and inadequate medical care must use 25% of his damage award to pay his lawyer
attorneys' fees, reducing the amount to be paid by the defendants from
$40,654.75 to $29,404.75. Jackson v. Austin, 267 F. Supp. 2d 1059 (D. Kan.
2003). [2004 JB Jan]
Ohio prisoner had a clearly established
right to marry his girlfriend, but it was not clearly established that he had
the right to affirmative assistance from correctional officials in obtaining a
marriage license. Correctional officials were therefore entitled to qualified
immunity from liability for money damages for initially failing to provide such
assistance. Couple, who married following settlement of their federal civil
rights lawsuit, were not "prevailing parties" entitled to an award of
attorneys' fees when they did not obtain a judgment on the merits of their
claim or a court-ordered consent decree. Toms v. Taft, No. 01-4035, 338 F.3d
519 (6th Cir. 2003). [2003 JB Nov]
Federal appeals court, by 6-5 vote, upholds
constitutionality of attorneys' fees limits in prisoner lawsuits imposed by the
Prison Litigation Reform Act. Trial judge's finding of an equal protection
violation overturned in case where prisoner was awarded damages for alleged
deliberate indifference to his need to be evaluated for a liver transplant.
Johnson v. Daley, #00-3981, 339 F.3d 582 (7th Cir.
2003).[2003 JB Oct]
Attorneys' fee restrictions imposed by the Prison
Litigation Reform Act apply to all lawsuits filed by a prisoner, not just those
that challenge prison conditions. Federal appeals court rules that they also
apply to a civil rights lawsuit challenging the denial of parole or otherwise
challenging the length of confinement. Court also rejects equal protection
challenge to the statute, and rules that it allows for the awarding of
attorneys' fees on work done litigating attorneys' fees issues (so-called
"fees on fees"). Jackson v. State Board of Pardons and Paroles, No.
02-15545, 331 F.3d 790 (11th Cir. 2003). [2003 JB Sep]
Federal appeals court holds that limits on
attorneys' fees awards established by the Prison Litigation Reform Act applied
to prisoner's successful challenge to retroactive change in rules concerning
the date of his eligibility for parole hearing. These limits apply to all
lawsuits brought by prisoners, not just those concerning "prison
conditions," but also those challenging the length of confinement. Jackson
v. State Board of Pardons and Paroles, #02-15545, 2003 U.S. App. Lexis 9773
(11th Cir.). [2003 JB Jul]
Attorneys' fee award limitations contained in
Prison Litigation Reform Act did not apply to a fee award to prevailing
plaintiff prisoners under the attorneys' fee sections of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) and Rehabilitation Act. Prevailing plaintiffs in
disability discrimination lawsuit against California correctional officials
were also entitled to fees for work their lawyers did in separate litigation
defending a judgment on a similar issue from another federal appeals court on
review before the U.S. Supreme Court. Armstrong v. Davis, #01-15779, 318 F.3d
965 (9th Cir. 2003). [2003 JB May]
Inmate was a "prevailing party" after
he was awarded only $1 in nominal damages in his lawsuit accusing correctional
officers of using excessive force against him, but an award of attorneys' fees
was not warranted in view of his limited success, since a jury found in favor
of one of the two officers, he had sought $790,000 in damages, the case did not
involve "significant legal issues," and there was no injunctive
relief granted. Ciaprazi v. County of Nassau, 195 F. Supp. 22d 398 (E.D.N.Y.
2002). [N/R]
A prisoner who was only awarded $1 in nominal damages
in his excessive force lawsuit against a correctional officer was limited by
the Prison Litigation Reform Act to a maximum award of attorneys' fees of
$1.50; federal appeals court upholds statutory limit against equal protection
argument. Foulk v. Charrier, #00-1132, 262 F.3d 687 (8th Cir. 2001). [2002
JB Apr]
Correctional defendants were not entitled to an
award of attorneys' fees following summary judgment in their favor against
estate of prisoner who died of pneumonia. Estate of Reynolds v. Greene County,
No. C-3-99-115, 163 F. Supp. 2d 890 (S.D. Ohio 2001). [N/R]
State was entitled to an award of attorneys' fees
against attorney for plaintiff prisoner for costs incurred in pursuing its
defense of an appeal of the prisoner's second lawsuit over same personal injury
claim. Second lawsuit was essentially the same as the first cause of action
which was dismissed, so there was no factual basis to justify the appeal.
Rodriguez v. Department of Correction, No. 26505, 29 P.3d 401 (Idaho 2001).
[N/R]
296:115 U.S. Supreme Court rejects "catalyst
theory" for the award of attorneys' fees in federal lawsuits; a plaintiff,
in order to be entitled to an attorneys' fee award must receive a court
judgment on the merits or a court- ordered consent decree; a voluntary change
in the behavior of the defendant will not suffice. Buckhannon Board and Care
Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, No.
99-1848, 121 S. Ct. 1835 (2001).
294:87 Prisoner awarded a total of $83,250 in
lawsuit asserting excessive use of force by correctional officer was not
entitled to $30,550.90 in attorneys' fees; such fees must be recalculated,
based on cap on hourly fees in Prison Litigation Reform Act after federal
appeals court rejects trial court's ruling that the cap violated prisoner's
right to equal protection. Wolff v. Moore, No. 00-3959, 00- 3995, 2000 U.S.
App. LEXIS 28054 (6th Cir.).
292:52 Prisoner who was awarded only $1 in
nominal damages in his lawsuit over his loss of consciousness while in
restraint was only entitled to $1.50 in attorneys' fees, not the $3,892.50
awarded by the trial court; cap on attorneys' fees in Prison Litigation Reform
Act applies to awards of nominal damages and does not violate prisoner's
rights. Voivin v. Black, No. 99-2085, 225 F.3d 36 (1st Cir. 2000).
290:19 Federal trial judge rules that attorneys'
fees limits of Prison Litigation Reform Act violate equal protection; plaintiff
who was awarded $40,000 in damages for inadequate medical care is awarded
$88,578.81 in attorneys' fees and costs. Johnson v. Daley, 117 F. Supp. 2d 889
(W.D. Wis. 2000).
286:154 County was liable for attack by other
prisoners on man arrested for traffic offenses; sheriff had a policy of
confining all arrestees, including those with prior felony arrests and a
history of violence, together in one large cell, which amounted to deliberate
indifference to the risk of harm to prisoners such as the plaintiff; limits on
attorneys' fees in the Prison Litigation Reform Act did not apply in a suit by
a former prisoner. Janes v. Hernandez, Nos. 99- 50092 & 99-50141, 215 F.3d
541 (5th Cir. 2000).
287:163 Even if prisoners' lawsuit was the
"catalyst" causing New Jersey to alter the application of a statute
denying prisoners access to pornographic materials, they were not entitled to
an award of attorneys' fees once an appeals court ruled that the statute did
not violate their rights; court finds an attorneys' fee award on a
"catalyst" theory would violate the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
Waterman v. Farmer, 84 F. Supp. 2d 579 (D.N.J. 2000).
284:115 Prisoner awarded $15,000 in damages for
correctional officers' use of excessive force against him was entitled to
attorneys' fee award of $22,499, not the $137,395 he requested; trial court
upholds constitutionality of Prison Litigation Reform Act's limitations on
prisoner attorneys' fee awards. Morrison v. Davis, 88 F. Supp. 2d 799 (S.D.
Ohio 2000).
284:120 Female prisoner and her husband, who was
allowed to attend the birth of their child after filing a federal civil rights
lawsuit, were prevailing parties entitled to $5,743.67 in attorneys' fees and
costs; hourly fee limits of Prison Litigation Reform Act did not apply since
the husband was not a prisoner; lawsuit claimed denial was based on prisoner
giving newspaper interview regarding prison conditions. Turner v. Wilkinson, 92
F. Supp. 2d 697 (S.D. Ohio 1999).
279:37 UPDATE: Law firm that won $3.75 million
award for male correctional officer sexually harassed by a female co-worker
awarded $822,000 in attorneys' fees, including an enhancement based on an
evaluation that it pursued a "difficult" case. Lockley v. New Jersey,
L-03195- 94, New Jersey trial court, reported in The National Law Journal, p.
A12 (September 27, 1999).
279:42 Prison rule prohibiting religious services
in unauthorized areas did not provide Muslim prisoner with adequate notice that
his conduct of silent, individual, demonstrative prayer in recreation yard
would be a violation of the rule for which he could be disciplined; Attorneys'
fee cap of Prison Litigation Reform Act applied despite the fact that the
lawsuit was filed before the statute's enactment; $73,694.36 in fees and costs
awarded. Chatin v. Coombe, Nos. 98-2484, 98-2556, 186 F.3d 82 (2nd Cir. 1999).
272:115 Attorneys' fee cap in Prison Litigation
Reform Act applied to work done after law's effective date, even in cases which
were pending prior to the law's enactment. Martin v. Hadix, #98-262, 119 S. Ct.
1998 (1999).
265:3 Prisoner who was awarded $17,500 in damages
for correctional officer's failure to protect him from being stabbed by his
cellmate was not only entitled to $10,131.64 in attorneys' fees, but also to
attorneys' fees for the time his lawyer spent preparing a fee petition seeking
the attorneys' fee award; Prison Litigation Reform Act did not bar an award of
"fees on fees." Hernandez v. Kalinowski, #97-1734, 146 F.3d 196 (3rd
Cir. 1998).
267:36 Federal appeals court rules that
attorneys' fees limits in Prison Litigation Reform Act do not apply in cases
pending prior to Act's passage; U.S. Supreme Court grants review. Hadix v.
Johnson, # 96-2567, 143 F.3d 246 (6th Cir.), cert. granted, Johnson v. Hadix,
No. 98-262, 119 S. Ct. 508 (1998).
269:67 Prisoner who was awarded $35,000 in
compensatory damages against correctional sergeant, but nothing against eight
other defendants he claimed also harassed him in retaliation for his grievance
activities, to receive $91,212.30 in attorneys' fees and $3,525.86 in court
costs; failure to prevail against eight of nine defendants did not require reduction
of attorneys' fees award when claims against defendants were interrelated.
Alnutt v. Cleary, 27 F.Supp.2d 395 (W.D.N.Y. 1998).
269:75 Jury awards almost $13 million to family
of schizophrenic man who died of asphyxiation after being placed in restraints
face down; trial judge also awards $343,953.70 in attorneys' fees, but rejects
one plaintiff's attorney's request for fees of $1,000 per hour. Swans v. City
of Lansing, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20043 (W.D. Mich. 1998).
270:87 State of Alabama found to have avoided any
good faith attempt to comply with federal overcrowding lawsuit consent decree;
while consent decree was properly dissolved at this point pursuant to
provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, attorneys' for plaintiff inmates
and for county were entitled to attorneys' fees for attempting enforcement of
decree while it was in effect. Chairs v. Burgess, 25 F.Supp.2d 1333 (N.D. Ala.
1998).
271:99 Prisoner awarded $35,000 in damages
against correctional officer who allegedly retaliated against him for his
activities as a prisoner representative on a grievance committee; prisoner
awarded $91,212.30 in attorneys' fees and $3,525.86 in costs; fees were reduced
to reflect dismissal of one of prisoner's four claims. Alnutt v. Cleary, 27
F.Supp.2d 395 (W.D.N.Y. 1998).
245:67 Federal appeals court overturns award of
$163,000 in attorneys' fees to attorneys who normally charged paying clients up
to $320/hour; correct standard for award of reasonable attorneys fees to
prevailing parties in federal civil rights case was prevailing market rate for
attorneys in similar litigation, so a lower fee might be appropriate if
evidence that a lawyer might have been found to represent prevailing inmates at
a lower rate was true. Cooper v. Casey, 97 F.3d 914 (7th Cir. 1996).
249:132 Federal appeals court upholds award of
$6,005.40 in attorneys' fees and costs to plaintiff inmate awarded $1 by jury
in civil rights lawsuit against correctional officials. Muhammad v. Lockhart,
104 F.3d 1069 (8th Cir. 1997).
254:23 Settlement in class action lawsuit brought
by prisoners, claiming that prison officials failed to protect them from
violence by other prisoners during prison riot, includes establishment of $4.1
million settlement fund; court awards $1.4 million in attorneys' fees and
$258,613.41 in costs. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, In re, 173 F.R.D.
205 (S.D. Ohio 1997).
256:52 Prisoner was entitled to attorneys' fees
of $8,346.35 and $2,952.82 in expenses as prevailing party despite trial
court's rejection of damage claims against individual correctional officials
and rejection of claim for injunction against prison smoking; appeals court
upholds finding that prisoner's lawsuit was a factor in adoption of no-smoking
policy. Weaver v. Clarke, 120 F.3d 852 (8th Cir. 1997).
257:67 Jail inmate who received $5,000 damage
award against sheriff for failure to provide medical attention, as well as
injunctive relief against lack of fresh air in jail during hot weather, was
prevailing party entitled to an award of attorneys' fees. Crusoe v. Nunley, 699
So.2d 941 (Miss. 1997).
[N/R] Prisoner awarded only $1 in nominal damages
was still entitled to an award of attorneys' fees as a "prevailing
party" when relief from further punishment without due process was
"the most basic remedy" sought; jury found that correctional officer
violated prisoner's rights by taunting him about his failure to obtain
medication for anxiety disorder. O'Connor v. Huard, 117 F.3d 12 (1st Cir.
1997).
232:62 Corrections Department was not liable for
fellow employees sexually harassing remarks about female employee's nipples
when Department made a prompt and effective response to remedy the situation
after she complained; injunction and award of attorneys' fees to female
employee overturned by federal appeals court. Spicer v. Com. of Va., Dept. of
Corrections, 66 F.3d 705 (4th Cir. 1995).
230:27 State of Louisiana and prison guard liable
for $150,000 in damages to child of female inmate conceived as a result of
guard raping her in prison; guard but not state also liable for $35,000 in
attorney fees. Latullas v. State, 658 So.2d 800 (La. App. 1995).
232:57 Georgia prisoner had no constitutionally
protected liberty interest in parole; Parole Board was not liable for departing
from its own guidelines in denying parole to prisoner; federal appeals court
overturns award of attorneys' fees to plaintiff prisoner. O'Kelley v. Snow, 53
F.3d 319 (11th Cir. 1995).
234:84 Update: Roman Catholic inmates who received
no money damages and had summary judgment entered against them on claim they
were entitled to unfettered/unsupervised use of religious sacramental articles
were nevertheless entitled to $128,811.47 in attorneys' fees and costs, plus
interest on that amount, because their suit caused prison officials to agree to
expanded access to religious services and religious articles. Friend v.
Kolodzieczak, 65 F.3d 1514 (9th Cir. 1995). [Cross- reference: Religion].
217:4 Plaintiff prisoner, awarded $1 in compensatory
and $1 in punitive damages, was entitled to an award of attorneys' fees,
federal appeals court rules, but reduces $25,000 award to $10,000 to reflect
plaintiff's failure to prevail on some claims. Jones v. Lockhart, 29 F.3d 422
(8th Cir. 1994).
227:164 Court approves $1.4 million in attorneys'
fees and court costs to inmates' lawyers in class action suit against
Pennsylvania prisons following settlement of class action suit. Austin v.
Pennsylvania Dept. of Corrections, 876 F.Supp. 1437 (E.D. Pa. 1995).
227:164 Indiana prisoners in maximum control unit
who achieved settlement in suit challenging conditions in unit awarded
$301,229.83 in attorneys' fees and costs. Taifa v. Bayh, 868 F.Supp. 237 (N.D.
Ind. 1994).
[N/R] Prisoner who prevailed in federal civil
rights lawsuit while acting as his own attorney was entitled to an award of
attorney's fees for services of "standby" counsel. Miller v.
Commissioner of Correction, 629 N.E.2d 315 (Mass. App. 1994).
Prisoners were entitled to attorneys' fees as
prevailing parties, despite failure to obtain money damages or injunctive
relief when unacceptable conditions at jail were "drastically
imprisoned" immediately following commencement of suit and no prior plans
for such improvements existed. Pembroke v. Wood Co., Tex. 981 F.2d 225 (5th
Cir. 1993).
Prisoner who sought $900,000 in damages against
four defendants because he was attacked by a K-9 dog in jail, but who was
awarded only $1 in damages against only one defendant, was entitled only to
$2,118.50 in attorneys' fees rather than the requested $29,101.50. Dillenbeck
v. Hayes, 830 F Supp. 673 (N.D.N.Y. 1993).
Plaintiff prisoners were entitled to $38,000 in
attorneys' fees when their lawsuit challenging a state statute requiring prisoner
"co-payment" for medical visits was a "substantial
catalyst" in obtaining amendment of the statute, even though amended
statute was upheld as constitutional. Collins v. Romer, 962 F.2d 1508 (10th
Cir. 1992).
Federal appeals court orders reduction in amount
of $6,627 million attorneys' fee award to prevailing prisoners in California
class action suit; use of a doubling multiplier to enhance award because the
case was taken on a contingency basis was not permissible. Gates v. Deukmejian,
977 F.2d 1300 (9th Cir. 1992).
Court remands, for reconsideration, case in which
inmate plaintiffs who obtained only technical relief were awarded attorneys'
fees. cert. granted sub nom. Kolodzieczak v. Friend, No. 113 S.Ct. 1038 (1993).
Civil rights plaintiff solely seeking monetary
damages who was awarded only $1 in nominal damages was a "prevailing
party," but was not entitled to attorneys' fee award of $280,000; Court
states that, in such cases, "the only reasonable fee is usually no fee at
all." Farrar v. Hobby, 113 S. Ct. 566 (1992).
Plaintiff awarded $150,000 for suicide of
pretrial detainee, $152,284 for trial court attorneys' fees, and $48,576 for
appeals attorneys' fees was also entitled to attorneys' fees expended in
opposing defendant's two petitions seeking review by the U.S. Supreme Court,
even though one of them was granted. Cabrales v. Co. of Los Angeles, 935 F.2d
1050 (9th Cir. 1991).
Prisoner who was awarded $1 by jury in suit over
alleged beating by correctional officer was not a "prevailing
plaintiff" entitled to an award of attorneys' fees; prison superintendent
was entitled to an award of costs because of prisoner's earlier rejection of
5,000 settlement offer. Denny v. Hinton, 131 F.R.D. 659 (M.D.N.C. 1990).
Former pretrial detainee awarded $29,760 in
attorneys' fees and costs for case in which he was awarded $10,000 for due
process violations in disciplinary hearing. Williams v. City of New York, 728
F.Supp. 1067 (S.D.N.Y. 1990).
Inmate awarded $1 because jail employees opened
three legal letters outside his presence was prevailing party entitled to
$2,727 in attorney's fees; defendant sheriff awarded $1,810 in attorney's fees
for defense against inmate's other, frivolous claims. Faulkner v. McLochlin,
732 F.Supp. 945 (N. D. Ind. 1990).
Court awards $1.48 million in attorneys' fees,
costs and expenses to counsel for partially successful plaintiff inmates. Knop
v. Johnson, 712 F.Supp. 571 (W.D. Mich. 1989).
Award of attorneys' fee may be increased because
of delay in payment; payment for paralegal and law clerk work may be awarded.
Missouri v. Jenkins, 109 S.Ct. 2463 (1989).
Attorney for successful plaintiff prisoner
entitled to $100 per hour in fees, despite his normal rate being $80 per hour.
Bailey v. Wood, 708 F.Supp. 249 (D. Minn. 1989).
Entry of declaratory judgment in party's favor
does not automatically render party entitled to attorneys' fees. Rhodes v.
Stewart, 109 S.Ct. 202 (1988).
Inmate who acted as her own lawyer not entitled
to attorneys' fees. Coleman v. Turner, 838 F.2d 1004 (8th Cir. 1988).
U.S. Supreme Court denies award of attorney's
fees to inmate who did not receive any relief on the merits of his claim.
Hewitt v. Helms, 107 S.Ct. 2672 (1987).
Pretrial detainee awarded $400 in damages for
forcible administration of thorazine, also granted $39,000 in attorneys' fees
and costs. Bee v. Greaves, 669 F.Supp. 372 (D. Utah 1987).
Injured inmate awarded damages, although
"equally negligent" in incident, entitled to award of costs even when
he rejected a higher settlement offer. Kusniryk v. Arrowhead Regional
Corrections Boarrd, 413 N.W.2d 182 (Minn. App. 1987).
Inmate who prevailed in civil rights suit over
prison beating awarded $174,020.83 in attorneys' fees; amount awarded adjusted
upward because of undesirability of case and contingent fee basis. Garmong v.
Montgomery Co., 668 F.Supp. 1000 (S.D Texas, 1987).
Inmates who brought class action suit challenging
prison conditions awarded $64,203 attorneys' fees. Toussaint v. McCarthy, 826
F.2d 901 (9th Cir. 1987).
Volunteer Amicus Curiae attorney's fee award in
civil rights case overturned. Morales v. Turman, 820 F.2d 728 (5th Cir. 1987).
U.S. Supreme Court allows attorneys to waive fees
in settlements. Evans v. Jeff D., 475 U.S. 717 (1986).
Court lacks authority to award attorney's fees
for personnel proceedings. Neb. Dept. of Correctional Serv. v. Carroll, 383
N.W.2d 740 (Neb. 1986).
Rates charged for attorneys, legal assistants and
law clerks were reasonable. Ramos v. Lamm, 632 F.Supp. 376 (D. Colo. 1986).
Lead counsel entitled to one-third fee
enhancement for reaching settlement. MacLaird v. Werger, 633 F.Supp. 286 (D.
Wyo. 1986).
Habeas corpus action fits under civil attorney
fees statute. In re Head, 228 Cal.Rptr. 184 (App. 1986).
Attorneys get nearly $145,000 in fees for jail
conditions case. Clayton v. Thurman, 775 F.2d 1096 (10th Cir. 1985).
Court fines inmates for filing frivolous suits.
Dominguez v. Figel, 626 F.Supp. 368 (N.D. Ind. 1986).
Inmate fined for bringing lawsuit. Williams v.
Duckworth, 617 F.Supp. 597 (D.C. Ind. 1985).
Over $600,000 awarded for successfully
challenging medical care provisions. Lightfoot v. Walker, 619 F.Supp. 1481
(D.C. Ill. 1985).
Plaintiffs must pay defendants' attorney's fees
after refusing settlement. Crossman v. Marcoccio, C.A. No. 84-0296, (D. R.I.
1985).
Paralegal entitled to fees for $35.00 an hour.
Morgan v. Nevada Bd. of State Prison Com'rs, 615 F.Supp. 882 (D.C. Nev. 1985).
Work for prosecuting fee petition is compensable.
Jonas v. Stack, 758 F.2d 567 (11th Cir. 1985).
Attorney fees to be paid by state for judgment in
guard's individual capacity. Leggett v. Badger, 759 F.2d 1556 (11th Cir. 1985).
Attorney fees awarded even though no money for
damages was obtained. Ganey v. Edwards, 759 F.2d 337 (4th Cir. 1985).
Clause in settlement agreement waiving right to
attorney fees unconstitutional: Plaintiff is prevailing party despite low
amount of damages obtained. Gillespie v. Brewer, 602 F.Supp. 218 (N.D. W. Va.
1985). State ordered to pay attorney fees even though judgment was against
official in individual capacity. Glover v. Alabama Dept. of Corrections, 753
F.2d 1569 (11th Cir. 1985).
Court dismisses county's suit challenging payment
of attorney's fees to court-appointed defenders. Pope Co. v. Street, 682 S.W.2d
749 (Ark. 1985).
Obtaining a consent decree regarding jail
conditions entitles attorney to fees as prevailing party. Poston v. Fox, 577
F.Supp. 915 (D. N.J. 1984).
Plaintiffs entitled to attorney's fees even
though they did not obtain full relief. Wabasha v. Solem, 580 F.Supp. 448 (D.
S.D. 1984).
No attorney fees awarded since habeas corpus
action was brought instead of civil rights action to challenge work programs.
In re Head, 1st Dist. Ct. of Appeal, No. A027830.
Plaintiff's attorney fees to be determined by
"extent" of success especially when many claims are litigated but few
are proven. Hensley v. Eckerhart, U.S. 103 S.Ct. 1933 (1983).
Attorney's fees awarded to inmate's counsel for
successfully obtaining exercise privileges. Daniels v. McKinney, 193 Cal.Rptr.
842 (App. 1983).
Although attorneys were entitled to fees for
bringing inmate's civil action, they were not entitled to fees for having
defended inmate against criminal charges as a prerequisite to bringing civil
action. Greer v. Holt, 718 F.2d 206 (6th Cir. 1983).
Parents prevailing in civil rights claim for
son's jail suicide entitled to attorney's fees despite claims were not strong,
and not all defendants found liable. Lyons v. Cunningham, 583 F.Supp. 1147
(S.D. N.Y. 1983).
Attorney's fees awarded against county in jail
conditions case. Inmates Allegheny co. Jail v. Pierce, 716 F.2d 177 (3rd Cir.
1983).
$140,000 in attorney fees awarded in consent
decree between inmates and county officials regarding jail conditions in
general. Standwood v. Green, 559 F.Supp. 196 (D. Ore. 1983).
No attorney fees to inmate even though he secured
$5,000 judgment against county and sheriff for assault by fellow inmate.
Verdugo v. Pima Co., 661 P.2d 665 (Ariz. App. 1983).
No attorney fees to inmate who represents self
and wins case. Turman v. Tuttle, 711 F.2d 148 (10th Cir. 1983).
Attorney fees not awarded. Officials changed
classification procedures prior to lawsuit. Dover v. Rose, 709 F.2d 436 (6th
Cir. 1983).
$20,000 attorney fees for appeal litigation.
State appealed court decision on improper lockdown and lost. Preston v.
Thompson, 565 F.Supp. 310 (N.D. Ill. 1983).
Attorney fees including travel and food expenses
awarded to inmate's out-of--state attorneys. Palmigiano v. Garrahy, 707 F.2d
636 (1st Cir. 1983).
Attorney fees awarded even though the suit
alleging improper transfer was mooted by the inmate's parole. Fitzharris v.
Wolff, 702 F.2d 836 (9th Cir. 1983).
Attorney fees awarded; female inmates won case on
"exercise" rights. Daniels v. McKinney, 193 Cal.Rptr. 842 (App.
1983).
Employee suspensions were improper. Attorney fees
awarded were excessive. Gabriele v. Southworth, 712 F.2d 1505 (1st Cir. 1983).
Substantial attorney fees awarded-sex
discrimination claim by female correction guards. Coble v. Texas Dept. of
Corrs., 568 F.Supp. 410 (S.D. Tex. 1983).
Inmate's suit successful. Almost $200,000
attorney fees awarded. Martino v. Carey, 568 F.Supp. 848 (D. Ore. 1983).
Attorney's Fees awarded ($110,000) when
settlement agreement doesn't discuss; no implied waiver. Benitez v. Collazo,
571 F.Supp. 246 (D.P.R. 1983).
Tennessee Federal Court orders Department of
Corrections to pay $9,084 in attorney's fees to successful civil rights
litigant. Vaughn v. Trotter, 516 F.Supp. 902 (M.D. Tenn. 1981).
Federal appeals court holds that $44,985 attorney's
fees award is excessive; rules that compensating inmate's counsel at uniform
rate for all hours spent on case was not an abuse of discretion. Bonner v.
Coughlin, 657 F.2d 931 (7th Cir. 1981).
$12,000 attorney fees in inmate's case on general
jail conditions. Miller v. Carson, 628 F.2d 346 (5th Cir. 1980).
Fifth Circuit rules that interest on attorney's
fees is recoverable for period between judgment and appeal. Gates v. Collier,
616 F.2d 1268 (5th Cir. 1980).
Violations of civil rights (Sec. 1983) can be
based on federal statutory law as well as constitutional issues. Attorney fees
(Sec. 1988) can be awarded even when Sec. 1983 action is brought in state
court. Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1, 100 S.Ct. 2502 (1980).
Attorney's fees not to be awarded on
percentage-of- judgment basis. Furtado v. Bishop, 604 F.2d 80 (1st Cir. 1979).
Federal judge delineates reasoning behind factors
in granting attorney's fee awards. Imprisoned Citizens Union v. Shapp, 473
F.Supp. 1017 (E.D. Pa. 1979).