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

• Est. OF Joseph D. Farrar & Dale Lawson Farrar v. Cain
  941 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-17 ·cited 23×
• Anthony v. Baker
  767 F.2d 657· 10th Cir.· 1985-06-17 ·cited 23×
  The court held that state and federal officers can be liable under § 1983 and § 1985(2) for conspiring to procure groundless indictments based on fabricated evidence or false testimony, and that the district court erred in granting directed verdicts for Baker and Newton.
• Aussie L. Robinson v. Monsanto Co.
  758 F.2d 331· 8th Cir.· 1985-04-01 ·cited 23×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the magistrate had jurisdiction, the juror's nondisclosure did not warrant an evidentiary hearing, the jury instructions were proper, and attorneys' fees were not warranted for the defendant.
• Hastings v. N. E. Indep. Sch. Dist.
  615 F.2d 628· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the suit and awarding attorney's fees for failure to disclose union membership lists, as such disclosure could infringe on First Amendment rights.
• Quesada v. Thomason
  850 F.2d 537· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-23 ·cited 22×
  A district court cannot reduce a statutory attorney fee award below the lodestar amount based on the existence of a contingent-fee agreement or the simplicity of the case's issues.
• Jensen v. City OF SAN Jose & Harry Stangel
  806 F.2d 899· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-17 ·cited 22×
• Aubin v. Fudala
  782 F.2d 287· 1st Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 22×
  A plaintiff is entitled to prejudgment interest on a state law negligence claim from the date suit is filed, and attorney fees under § 1988 should be awarded based on the practical extent of success, not solely on the ratio of damages awarded on civil rights claims to total damag
• Cruz v. W.B. "Bill" Hauck
  762 F.2d 1230· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying supplemental attorney's fees for defending the original fee claim and complying with court orders, and that its findings were insufficient to deny the motion as untimely.
• Crooker v. Env't Prot. Agency
  763 F.2d 16· 1st Cir.· 1985-05-29 ·cited 22×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The Equal Access to Justice Act does not authorize an award of attorney's fees to a pro se litigant.
• Santiago v. Victim Servs. Agency of the Metro. Assistance Corp.
  753 F.2d 219· 2d Cir.· 1985-01-11 ·cited 22×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to award attorney's fees after the plaintiffs filed a notice of dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(i) before the defendants filed an answer or summary judgment motion.
• Hart v. Dudley Walker
  720 F.2d 1436· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's actions constituted false arrest, assault, and deprivation of property rights, and that he was not entitled to qualified immunity.
• Haygood v. Evelle J. Younger
  718 F.2d 1472· 9th Cir.· 1983-10-25 ·cited 22×
  Post-deprivation processes can satisfy the Fourteenth Amendment's due process requirement for liberty interests, and detention beyond a lawful term is not automatically cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
• Espino v. Besteiro
  708 F.2d 1002· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-05 ·cited 22×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that a district court abused its discretion by denying attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 based on the defendant's good faith, as good faith is not a special circumstance justifying denial. The court also held that a plaintiff who prevails on a non-fee-generati
• Rosewitz v. Patience Latting
  689 F.2d 175· 10th Cir.· 1982-09-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the city's grievance procedure, which denied an employee the right to an attorney, confrontation, and cross-examination, did not violate procedural due process, but the denial of the defendant's motion for attorney's fees without a hearing was an error.
• KIM v. Coppin State Coll.
  662 F.2d 1055· 4th Cir.· 1981-10-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a directed verdict on the compensation issue, particularly concerning the First Amendment claim, and remanded for a new trial on that issue, while affirming the directed verdict on promotion and working conditions.
• Littlefield v. Deland
  641 F.2d 729· 10th Cir.· 1981-05-12 ·cited 22×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that confining a pretrial detainee in extreme conditions for an excessive period constitutes punishment, violating due process rights.
• David Haywood in behalf of himself & others similarly situated v. Ball
  634 F.2d 740· 4th Cir.· 1980-11-13 ·cited 22×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that collateral estoppel did not bar punitive damages because the issues in the two trials were not identical, and affirmed the denial of attorney fees because the plaintiff did not prevail on his federal claim.
• Reynaldo Tongol v. Usery
  601 F.2d 1091· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-06 ·cited 22×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the federal regulation prohibiting states from waiving recoupment of overpayments was invalid as exceeding the Secretary's statutory authority and conflicting with congressional intent to apply state law. The court also held that plaintiffs stated a claim unde
• Butler v. Goldblatt Bros., Inc.
  589 F.2d 323· 7th Cir.· 1978-12-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that police officers lacked probable cause for warrantless arrests, making the good faith defense unavailable under § 1983, and that Goldblatt's mere provision of information to police did not constitute actionable participation in the arrests under either federal
• Foley v. City OF Lowell
  948 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1991-10-23 ·cited 21×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that evidence of subsequent police misconduct is admissible to prove a prior municipal policy of indifference, and that prejudgment interest should run until the date of final judgment.
• Lewis v. Kendrick
  944 F.2d 949· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-26 ·cited 21×
  An unreasonably high fee demand by a plaintiff's attorney does not automatically forfeit the plaintiff's right to any fee award.
• Mims v. Shapp
  744 F.2d 946· 3d Cir.· 1984-09-17 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the prisoner's prolonged administrative segregation, reviewed through subjective evaluations by prison officials, did not violate his due process rights, and thus the damages award was reversed.
• Am. Fam. Life Assurance Co. of Columbus v. Teasdale
  733 F.2d 559· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-03 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the former Governor was entitled to qualified immunity and that the plaintiff failed to prove its claims, justifying the award of attorney's fees.
• Am. Charities for Reasonable Fundraising Reg., Inc. v. Pinellas Cnty.
  278 F. Supp. 2d 1301· M.D. Fla.· 2003-06-24 ·cited 20×
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to award plaintiffs $257,151.03 in attorneys' fees and $9,938.35 in costs and expenses.
• Rode v. Dellarciprete
  892 F.2d 1177· 3d Cir.· 1990-01-04 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's attorney fee award, remanding for further explanation on certain reductions.
• Eddy v. City of Miami
  715 F. Supp. 1553· S.D. Fla.· 1989-05-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that claims against Mayor Suarez and the Police Department were properly dismissed, but claims against the City of Miami and Chief Anderson could proceed. State law claims were dismissed for insufficient notice.
• Conklin v. Lovely
  834 F.2d 543· 6th Cir.· 1987-12-03 ·cited 20×
• Cleveland Nisby and Hattie West v. Comm'rs Court OF Jefferson Cnty.
  798 F.2d 134· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to articulate its reasoning for the attorney fee award in accordance with the established twelve-factor standard.
• Vandenplas v. City OF Muskego
  797 F.2d 425· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in finding the plaintiffs' § 1983 claims frivolous, thus reversing the award of attorneys' fees.
• Alamo Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. v. State Bd. OF Educ.
  790 F.2d 1153· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-29 ·cited 20×·via Claim For Attorney'S Fees Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988
  The court held that the Education for All Handicapped Children Act requires a school district to provide structured summer educational services and out-of-district transportation if a handicapped child would suffer significant regression without them. It also remanded the issue o
• Exeter-West Greenwich Reg'l Sch. Dist. v. Pontarelli
  788 F.2d 47· 1st Cir.· 1986-04-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 can be awarded for work done on a state-law issue certified to a state supreme court, even if the federal § 1983 claim is dismissed as moot, and that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar such an award.
• Lovell v. City OF Kankakee
  783 F.2d 95· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying attorney's fees because the plaintiffs were prevailing parties, as their lawsuit was causally linked to the defendants' stipulation not to enforce the sign ordinance.
• Corbitt v. Andersen
  778 F.2d 1471· 10th Cir.· 1985-12-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings that the defendant violated the plaintiff's civil rights and tortiously interfered with his contracts, and that the action was not time-barred.
• Sisco v. J.S. Alberici Constr. Co., Inc.
  733 F.2d 55· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-24 ·cited 20×
  A percentage fixed in a contingent-fee contract is not an absolute ceiling on attorneys' fees that can be awarded under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 or Title VII.
• Gautreaux v. The Chicago Hous. Auth.
  690 F.2d 601· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-30 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge believes the district court's award of attorneys' fees for work performed before the effective date of 42 U.S.C. § 1988 was excessive and beyond Congressional intent.
• Agrippa Hymes v. Harnett Cnty. Bd. OF Educ.
  664 F.2d 410· 4th Cir.· 1981-11-17 ·cited 20×
  Attorney's fees are available under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for relief obtained through 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but not for claims solely redressable by the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA), which provides an exclusive remedy without fee-shifting provisions. The court remand
• Brown v. Bullard Indep. Sch. Dist.
  640 F.2d 651· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-25 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the judgment regarding liability and damages but vacated the attorney's fees award and remanded for reconsideration due to the trial court's failure to provide adequate findings.
• D'Andrea v. Adams
  626 F.2d 469· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a public university professor's statements to a legislative budget subcommittee suggesting impropriety in university fund use were constitutionally protected under the First Amendment, and there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find that administrators kn
• Huntley v. Cmty. Sch. Bd. OF Brooklyn
  579 F.2d 738· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the $100 nominal damages award was not inadequate given the Supreme Court's ruling in Carey v. Piphus, and that the appellant was not entitled to a new trial or punitive damages.
• The Nationalist Movement v. The City OF Cumming
  913 F.2d 885· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the First Amendment does not prohibit public entities from collecting charges that fairly reflect the costs incurred in connection with an activity involving expression, and that such fees are not limited to nominal amounts.
• McDONALD v. DOE
  748 F.2d 1055· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-20 ·cited 19×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  A party who loses on a federal civil rights claim but wins on a pendent state law claim is not entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Latino Project, Inc. v. City OF Camden
  701 F.2d 262· 3d Cir.· 1983-03-03 ·cited 19×
  A party who has not filed a civil complaint on the merits of a claim under the civil rights statutes enumerated in 42 U.S.C. § 1988 is not entitled to attorney's fees under that section, even if they obtained substantial relief in an administrative proceeding.
• Swanson v. Elmhurst Chrysler Plymouth, Inc.
  882 F.2d 1235· 7th Cir.· 1989-08-16 ·cited 18×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that Title VII does not provide for nominal damages or attorney's fees when a plaintiff proves sexual harassment but not a discharge or other tangible loss related to the harassment.
• Luethje v. The Peavine Sch. Dist. OF Adair Cnty.
  872 F.2d 352· 10th Cir.· 1989-04-14 ·cited 18×
  The plaintiff is a "prevailing party" under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and is entitled to attorney's fees because her lawsuit was a substantial factor in causing the school board's policy change, which was required by law.
• Lightfoot v. Walker
  826 F.2d 516· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-24 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the district court's award of attorney's fees, finding the hours expended and hourly rates reasonable given the complexity of the litigation and the state's resistance.
• Coates v. Bechtel
  811 F.2d 1045· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in awarding attorney's fees to the prevailing defendant because the plaintiffs' civil rights action was not frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless at the time it was filed.
• Ekanem v. The Health & Hosp. Corp. OF Marion Cnty.
  778 F.2d 1254· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-05 ·cited 18×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that plaintiffs were not prevailing parties entitled to appellate attorneys fees because they did not achieve the primary relief sought and prior appellate rulings did not constitute prevailing on the merits.
• Bernstein v. Menard
  728 F.2d 252· 4th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that an appeal from a merits judgment is untimely if not filed within the prescribed period, even if attorney's fees have not yet been awarded. The court also affirmed the award of attorney's fees against the plaintiff.
• Chesny v. Marek
  720 F.2d 474· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-03 ·cited 18×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  A Rule 68 offer that includes attorney's fees is valid, and rejection of such an offer does not preclude a plaintiff from recovering attorney's fees for work done after the offer was made, as doing so would abridge the substantive right to fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Burke v. Guiney
  700 F.2d 767· 1st Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 18×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the plaintiff's statements did not violate the settlement agreement, thus denying contempt sanctions, and that the plaintiff is entitled to post-judgment interest. The court remanded the attorney's fees issue for further explanation.