42 U.S.C. § 1988 (Attorney'S Fees)

525 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 135 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Laje v. R. E. Thomason Gen. Hosp.
  665 F.2d 724· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-14 ·cited 56×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The hospital district is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity, and the award for mental anguish due to procedural due process violations is affirmed, but the award for lost salary is reversed.
• Badillo v. Cent. Steel & Wire Co.
  717 F.2d 1160· 7th Cir.· 1983-09-23 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for attorneys' fees and costs, as the plaintiff's claims were not frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless, and there was no showing of bad faith by the plaintiff or counsel.
• Dean v. Gladney
  621 F.2d 1331· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-24 ·cited 54×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that municipalities and counties are not liable under Bivens for the acts of their employees under a theory of respondeat superior, and that joint and several liability was improperly imposed on Deputy Saldivar for the actions of Officer Maddox.
• Johnson v. Brelje
  701 F.2d 1201· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 53×
  The dissenting judge believes the Illinois Criminal Code and Mental Health Code provide sufficient due process for individuals found unfit to stand trial, making additional federal due process requirements unnecessary.
• Hermes v. Hein
  742 F.2d 350· 7th Cir.· 1984-08-17 ·cited 52×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment for the defendants on the plaintiffs' First Amendment and due process claims, but remanded the case for further consideration of the award of attorneys' fees.
• van Ooteghem v. Hartsell Gray
  654 F.2d 304· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-24 ·cited 52×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding that the employee's constitutional right of freedom of speech was violated, but vacated and remanded other issues for further consideration.
• Ross v. Horn
  598 F.2d 1312· 3d Cir.· 1979-05-25 ·cited 52×
  The court held that New Jersey's procedures for handling suspected unemployment fraud, which include a pre-determination interview but not a full evidentiary hearing, satisfy due process and the "when due" requirement. However, the court remanded the attorney's fees issue for fur
• Dewell v. Lawson
  489 F.2d 877· 10th Cir.· 1974-01-07 ·cited 52×
  The court, in part, affirmed the dismissal of the action against the City of Oklahoma City and the Chief of Police, finding the complaint did not state a civil rights cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Taylor v. Sterrett
  640 F.2d 663· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-25 ·cited 51×
  The court held that attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 could only be awarded for work on supplemental enforcement proceedings pending on the effective date of the statute, not for the initial case if fees had been denied. It affirmed the denial of fees for two organizations d
• Coleen R. Roberts v. Coll. OF THE Desert
  870 F.2d 1411· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-22 ·cited 50×
  The court held that Title VII does not preempt § 1983 claims for constitutional violations and that a property interest in employment can arise from mutual understandings. It also found the statute of limitations defense waived and that the district court erred in reinstating the
• Hershinow v. M.F. Bonamarte, Jr.
  735 F.2d 264· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  A brief suspension for unprofessional conduct does not violate a public employee's liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment, nor does it infringe upon the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment.
• Harris v. Pirch
  677 F.2d 681· 8th Cir.· 1982-05-14 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict against Sheriff Pirch and Deputy Kipping, and that Kipping was entitled to qualified immunity.
• Jones v. Tex. Tech Univ.
  656 F.2d 1137· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-25 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the prior consent judgment barred the current lawsuit under res judicata, but reversed the award of attorneys' fees, finding the lawsuit was not frivolous.
• White v. NEW Hampshire Dep't OF Emp. Sec.
  629 F.2d 697· 1st Cir.· 1980-08-12 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  A motion for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 must be filed within the 10-day period prescribed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) for motions to alter or amend a judgment, and the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a late request.
• Muscare v. Quinn
  614 F.2d 577· 7th Cir.· 1980-02-13 ·cited 50×
  The court held that attorney's fees should only be awarded for the claim upon which the plaintiff prevailed, not for unsuccessful claims, and remanded for recalculation.
• Williams v. Leatherbury
  672 F.2d 549· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-08 ·cited 49×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  A plaintiff may be considered a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act even without a formal judgment, if their lawsuit was a substantial factor in achieving the desired outcome.
• Perez v. Univ. OF Puerto RICO
  600 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1979-06-19 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying attorney's fees to prevailing plaintiffs based on 'special circumstances' when only nominal damages were awarded.
• J & J Anderson, Inc. v. The Town OF Erie
  767 F.2d 1469· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that while the district court erred in finding special circumstances to deny attorney fees, the plaintiffs could not substantially prevail on their § 1983 claim, thus affirming the denial of fees.
• Wheatley v. Police Officers Michael Ford
  679 F.2d 1037· 2d Cir.· 1982-05-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the $55,000 damages award was excessive and reduced it to $25,000, and that the $10,000 bonus portion of the attorney's fees award was unwarranted, but affirmed the lodestar amount.
• Morrison v. Ayoob
  627 F.2d 669· 3d Cir.· 1980-07-29 ·cited 48×
  Judicial immunity does not bar an award of attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 against judicial officers in their official capacities, and plaintiffs were prevailing parties.
• Jordan v. Multnomah Cnty.
  815 F.2d 1258· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-24 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to adequately explain its fee calculations and that the denial of a multiplier was not an abuse of discretion.
• Seattle Sch. Dist. NO. 1 v. The State OF Wash.
  633 F.2d 1338· 9th Cir.· 1980-12-16 ·cited 47×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  A state statute that implicitly prohibits student assignments for racial balancing while permitting them for other reasons constitutes an impermissible racial classification under the Equal Protection Clause.
• Riddell v. The Nat'l Democratic Party
  624 F.2d 539· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-18 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the special circumstances cited by the district court were insufficient to justify denying attorneys' fees to the prevailing parties under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Lake Nacimiento Ranch Co. v. Cnty. OF SAN Luis Obispo
  830 F.2d 977· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-15 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Ranch's "as applied" taking claim was not ripe, its facial challenge was unsupported, and its due process claim failed due to adequate state remedies and lack of municipal policy. The denial of attorneys' fees to the County was not an abuse of discretion.
• Solomon Lusby v. T.G. & Y. Stores, Inc.
  749 F.2d 1423· 10th Cir.· 1984-11-23 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the jury's verdicts for civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendants were largely supported by the evidence, and that the plaintiffs substantially complied with the Oklahoma Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act notice requirement.
• Lynch v. City OF Milwaukee
  747 F.2d 423· 7th Cir.· 1984-10-31 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees, including a negative multiplier, despite the nominal damages awarded.
• Monahan v. State OF Neb.
  687 F.2d 1164· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-30 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the substantive claims were moot or barred by failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but remanded for a determination of attorney's fees for one plaintiff who had prevailed on preliminary relief.
• Clark v. City OF LOS Angeles & the Los Angeles Police Dep't
  803 F.2d 987· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-29 ·cited 45×
  The court held that while a multiplier can be applied to attorney's fees for civil rights litigation due to contingency and risk, it should not be applied to fees incurred in litigating the fee petition itself. The court affirmed the prevailing party status and the multiplier for
• Shimman v. Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs
  744 F.2d 1226· 6th Cir.· 1984-10-01 ·cited 44×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
• Berry v. McLEMORE
  670 F.2d 30· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 44×
  A municipality cannot be held liable under § 1983 absent evidence that the constitutional deprivation was pursuant to an official policy or custom, and a plaintiff cannot recover attorney fees from a party dismissed from the suit. However, the district court abused its discretion
• The Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Civiletti
  609 F.2d 514· D.C. Cir.· 1979-09-26 ·cited 44×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The dissenting judge argues that the Civil Rights Attorneys' Fees Awards Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. § 1988, authorizes fee awards against the United States, and that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in awarding fees to the prevailing parties.
• Perez v. BOU
  575 F.2d 21· 1st Cir.· 1978-05-05 ·cited 44×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the defendant official was not immune from liability for summary suspensions, that plaintiffs were entitled to attorneys' fees under § 1988, and that nominal damages were appropriate for the intangible loss of civil rights.
• Beazer v. NEW York City Transit Auth.
  558 F.2d 97· 2d Cir.· 1977-06-22 ·cited 44×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court affirmed the district court's holding that the Transit Authority's blanket exclusion of methadone users violated constitutional rights and affirmed the award of attorneys' fees, but modified the fee award by eliminating the 'premium'. The court also reversed the denial
• Bowman v. Pulaski Cnty. Special Sch. Dist.
  723 F.2d 640· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-29 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the involuntary transfers of the appellants constituted an abuse of discretion and violated their First Amendment rights, but affirmed the award of attorney fees.
• Miller v. Carson
  628 F.2d 346· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-14 ·cited 43×
  The court held that attorneys' fees and costs for post-judgment efforts are awardable under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 if those efforts are reasonably related to the claims upon which the plaintiff prevailed, even without a subsequent court order.
• Holley v. Abe Lavine
  605 F.2d 638· 2d Cir.· 1979-07-13 ·cited 43×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The Eleventh Amendment does not bar an award of retroactive welfare benefits against a County Social Services Commissioner, as a county is not an 'arm of the State' for these purposes. The court also affirmed the award of attorney fees.
• Wilmington v. J.I. Case Co.
  793 F.2d 909· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-09 ·cited 42×
  An arbitral decision does not preclude an independent cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and the jury determines the weight of such a decision as evidence.
• Ferdinand D. Wharton, Jr. v. Knefel
  562 F.2d 550· 8th Cir.· 1977-09-19 ·cited 42×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The trial court's finding that the plaintiff failed to prove discrimination was clearly erroneous; racial discrimination in housing is unlawful under federal civil rights acts.
• Mallory v. Harkness
  923 F. Supp. 1546· S.D. Fla.· 1996-03-12 ·cited 41×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the Attorney General and the Florida Bar are liable for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, with specific apportionment, and that the plaintiff is entitled to reasonable costs.
• Bennie Lenard v. Argento
  808 F.2d 1242· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the district court's award of attorney's fees was excessive and remanded for recalculation based on the relatedness of claims and the reasonableness of hours expended, considering the contingent fee agreement and overall relief obtained.
• Wojtkowski v. Cade
  725 F.2d 127· 1st Cir.· 1984-01-13 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the district court properly denied prejudgment interest on damages and attorney's fees, and that the awarded attorney's fee was reasonable.
• Gaines v. Dougherty Cnty. Bd. OF Educ.
  775 F.2d 1565· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-15 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the law of the case doctrine did not preclude an award of attorneys' fees for services performed prior to 1971, and that the district court abused its discretion in refusing to award such fees.
• Davis v. W. Cmty. Hosp.
  755 F.2d 455· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that Dr. Davis's letters were not protected speech, reversing his First Amendment claim, but affirmed his procedural due process claim. It also reversed his libel claim due to the jury finding the statements true and remanded for nominal damages on his equal protec
• Stathos v. Bowden
  728 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-22 ·cited 40×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict and damage award, finding no reversible error in the exclusion of evidence, jury instructions, or the award of attorney's fees, and amended the judgment for clarity.
• Williams v. Thomas
  692 F.2d 1032· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 40×
  The court affirmed the compensatory damages award but reversed the attorney's fees award, remanding for recalculation and holding the fees are payable by the County. The good faith defense on the § 1983 claim was not decided as recovery was affirmed on the state claim.
• Silas K. Brown v. Stackler
  612 F.2d 1057· 7th Cir.· 1980-01-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that a district court has discretion to deny attorney fees entirely when a claim is outrageously inflated, as a deterrent against unreasonable demands.
• Clanton v. Orleans Parish Sch. Bd.
  649 F.2d 1084· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-06 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the Board's maternity leave reinstatement policy, while not an irrebuttable presumption violating due process, constituted sex-based discrimination under Title VII because it imposed a burden on female teachers not suffered by male teachers.
• Fleming v. Cnty. OF Kane
  898 F.2d 553· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-27 ·cited 38×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence regarding the propriety of the Orchard Road project, and affirmed the denial of the motion for a new trial, but modified the damages award for lost wages.
• Leer v. Al Murphy
  844 F.2d 628· 9th Cir.· 1988-04-04 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the inmates failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding the actual and proximate cause of their injuries by any individual prison official, and thus summary judgment was appropriate.
• Lucas v. O'Loughlin
  831 F.2d 232· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-02 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the sheriff's actions, due to his absolute authority over deputies and county funding, constituted official policy for which the county could be liable, and that the county was not entitled to attorney fees as a prevailing party when the trial court itself rec