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

• Allan G. Charles, M.D. v. Daley
  846 F.2d 1057· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-05 ·cited 14×
  Private intervening defendants who did not violate plaintiffs' constitutional rights may nonetheless be held liable for attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 if the plaintiffs achieved prevailing-party status by succeeding on the merits against those intervenors. The critical di
• Weldon Wells v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist.
  793 F.2d 679· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the sufficiency of notice for the administrative hearing, and that the jury's excessive damages award indicated passion or prejudice, requiring a new trial.
• Gibbs v. Pierce Cnty. LAW Enf't Support Agency
  785 F.2d 1396· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims were timely filed, administrative remedies were exhausted, and the district court's finding of intentional wage discrimination was not clearly erroneous.
• Walje v. The City OF Winchester
  773 F.2d 729· 6th Cir.· 1985-09-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that general damages are available for violations of substantive constitutional rights, even without proof of actual injury, and that attorney fee awards must be explained with sufficient specificity.
• Jewell Nephew v. City OF Aurora
  766 F.2d 1464· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-10 ·cited 14×
  In a § 1983 case seeking monetary damages, attorney's fees awarded to prevailing plaintiffs must be reduced when they recover only nominal damages, reflecting their limited success.
• In re Horacek v. Thone
  710 F.2d 496· 8th Cir.· 1983-06-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the attorney was not entitled to fees under the consent decree or federal statutes because the consent decree did not provide for compensation and § 1988 does not authorize fees for state administrative proceedings absent a federal mandate.
• Palmigiano v. Garrahy
  707 F.2d 636· 1st Cir.· 1983-05-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that out-of-pocket expenses incurred by attorneys are recoverable as part of attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Bonnes v. Long
  651 F.2d 214· 4th Cir.· 1981-03-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that plaintiffs were prevailing parties entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 because the consent order conferred a benefit by resolving uncertainty and expanding access rights, and no special circumstances justified denial.
• Staten v. Hous. Auth. OF THE City OF Pittsburgh
  638 F.2d 599· 3d Cir.· 1980-11-25 ·cited 14×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that a local housing authority receiving federal funding is not automatically an "agency" of the United States immune from attorneys' fees awards under 28 U.S.C. § 2412. It also held that the district court must apply the "special circumstances" standard when consi
• Gibbs v. The Town OF Frisco City
  626 F.2d 1218· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-01 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in requiring the plaintiff to pay half of the attorney's fees awarded under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, as such a reduction is not justified by the nature of the case.
• David v. Travisono
  621 F.2d 464· 1st Cir.· 1980-05-16 ·cited 14×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976 applies to cases pending on its enactment, and the district court erred in finding special circumstances to deny fees based on the nature of the remaining issue or its confluence with other litigation.
• Holcomb v. United States
  622 F.2d 937· 7th Cir.· 1980-04-25 ·cited 14×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the taxpayers' promise to make monthly payments was not sufficient consideration for the government's alleged promise to allocate bankruptcy proceeds to their personal liability, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying attorney's fe
• Jones v. United States
  613 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-19 ·cited 14×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the taxpayer, having prevailed against the IRS's frivolous counterclaim, was eligible for attorney's fees under the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976.
• Sydney R. Prince, III v. United States
  610 F.2d 350· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-25 ·cited 14×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that Internal Revenue Code Section 1341 applies to the tax adjustment sought by the estate, but the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act does not apply to this case.
• Klotz v. United States
  602 F.2d 920· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court's findings that Klotz and Howe did not willfully fail to pay over withheld taxes were not clearly erroneous, and thus affirmed the judgment denying the government's counterclaim. Attorney's fees on appeal were denied.
• Davis v. Roadway Express, Inc.
  590 F.2d 140· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to appeal her individual claims and therefore lacked standing to appeal the class action issues. Attorney's fees were awarded to the defendant for the appeal.
• Zook v. Brown
  865 F.2d 887· 7th Cir.· 1989-01-17 ·cited 13×
  The court held that Standard 2.19 of the Sheriff's Department Operating Procedures Manual is constitutional both on its face and as applied to Deputy Zook, and that the application of Standard 4.4 was unconstitutional. The court also affirmed the denial of a jury trial for damage
• Webster v. Sowders
  846 F.2d 1032· 6th Cir.· 1988-05-18 ·cited 13×
  The court held that interim attorney fees and expert monitor costs awarded without findings on liability are not appealable interlocutorily and must be reversed and remanded. The court also held that a district court cannot impose Rule 11 sanctions for filing an appeal.
• Toussaint v. McCARTHY
  826 F.2d 901· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-02 ·cited 13×
  A party is entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for partial success on appeal, but the award must be reduced to reflect the limited extent of that success.
• Roberts v. Spalding
  783 F.2d 867· 9th Cir.· 1986-02-24 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the appellant's due process and equal protection theories, and affirmed the denial of attorney's fees.
• DeMIER v. Gondles
  676 F.2d 92· 4th Cir.· 1982-01-28 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court properly awarded attorney's fees to the prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, as the plaintiffs' lawsuit was a catalyst for the change in the strip search policy.
• Pressley v. Haeger
  977 F.2d 295· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an instruction on constructive knowledge was improper in a racial discrimination case requiring actual intent, but the error was harmless. The court also held that attorneys' fees must be awarded based on market rates, not a judge's determination of fairness.
• Carston v. The Cnty. OF Cook
  962 F.2d 749· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-12 ·cited 12×
  Cook County was obligated to recognize the protectible property interest in employment held by security officers under the HHGC merit system when it reacquired control of the hospital, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees.
• Crowder v. Sinyard
  884 F.2d 804· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the removal of seized property to another state did not violate the plaintiffs' constitutional right of access to the courts, and that a new trial was required on the Fourth Amendment claim due to errors in qualified immunity and jury instructions.
• Herrington v. Cnty. OF Sonoma
  883 F.2d 739· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that attorney's fees and costs can be awarded to prevailing parties under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 even if they did not fully prevail on all claims, and that a litigant's financial ability to pay counsel does not preclude an award.
• Venegas v. Skaggs
  867 F.2d 527· 9th Cir.· 1989-01-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the attorney's motion to intervene to confirm a lien for attorney's fees, and that a statutory award under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 does not limit an attorney's entitlement under a contingent fee agreement.
• Gilbert v. The City OF Little Rock
  867 F.2d 1063· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-27 ·cited 12×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to award backpay based on a speculative claim of earlier promotion and affirmed the attorney fee award as modified to reflect only enhancement for the risk of loss.
• Savidge v. Jaylon Fincannon
  836 F.2d 898· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-17 ·cited 12×
  The court should not have applied the 'clearly established' standard retroactively to the defendants' conduct, as the relevant rights were not settled at the time of the alleged violations.
• Venegas v. Wagner
  831 F.2d 1514· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the jury's verdict against officers Skaggs and Roberson, but not against officer Bostard, affirming the denial of JNOV for Skaggs and Roberson while affirming the grant of JNOV for Bostard.
• Council FOR Periodical Distribs. Ass'ns v. Evans
  827 F.2d 1483· 11th Cir.· 1987-09-21 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the injunction against prior restraint and vacated the attorney's fees award, remanding for apportionment.
• Lucero v. City OF Trinidad
  815 F.2d 1384· 10th Cir.· 1987-04-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in setting the amount of attorneys' fees by reducing hourly rates, as the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence of prevailing market rates.
• The Neb. Health Care Ass'n, Inc. v. Dunning
  778 F.2d 1291· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Nebraska's submission for fiscal year 1982-83 failed to comply with federal regulations, invalidating the approval of its reimbursement cap, and that the case for fiscal year 1983-84 was not ripe for judicial determination due to pending administrative proceed
• Trezevant v. City OF Tampa
  741 F.2d 336· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-06 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict and attorney fee award, finding sufficient evidence supported the verdict, the award was not excessive, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in calculating attorney fees.
• Willie M. v. Hunt
  732 F.2d 383· 4th Cir.· 1984-04-19 ·cited 12×
  Attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 are not recoverable for litigation interpreting a consent judgment when the parties did not prevail on those interpretation issues, as such litigation is distinct from the original civil rights claims. Fees for monitoring compliance with the
• Ky. Ass'n FOR Retarded Citizens, Inc. v. Conn
  718 F.2d 182· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-30 ·cited 12×
  A party must succeed on a significant issue in litigation to be considered a prevailing party for the purpose of recovering attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Laurenzo v. Miss. High Sch. Activities Ass'n, Inc.
  708 F.2d 1038· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-08 ·cited 12×
  A party is not considered a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 solely because they obtained an injunction pending appeal based on a substantial case and balance of equities, without a determination of the merits.
• Segarra v. M.J. McDADE
  706 F.2d 1301· 4th Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 12×
  A prison official's systematic and arbitrary prohibition of an inmate's right to call live witnesses in disciplinary hearings violates due process, even if the official has discretion to deny witnesses in specific cases.
• Sotomura v. Cnty. OF Haw.
  679 F.2d 152· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-07 ·cited 12×
  A party who prevails by obtaining dismissal of an appeal as untimely is considered a prevailing party entitled to attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Callion Robinson v. Moreland
  655 F.2d 887· 8th Cir.· 1981-07-31 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict for the plaintiff on the Eighth Amendment claim but reversed the magistrate's reduction of attorney fees, awarding a higher amount.
• Vasquez v. Patrolman Robert Fleming
  617 F.2d 334· 3d Cir.· 1980-02-13 ·cited 12×·via Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)
  The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, not the Virgin Islands Code, apply to appeals from the Virgin Islands district courts, meaning attorney fees are not automatically recoverable as costs under local law.
• Sheets v. Jimenez
  415 F. Supp. 3d 1115· M.D. Fla.· 2025-08-06 ·cited 11×
  The court recommended denying defendants' motion for attorney's fees, finding the plaintiff's § 1983 claims, while ultimately unsuccessful, were not frivolous or groundless.
• Johnson v. Mortham
  915 F. Supp. 1529· N.D. Fla.· 1996-10-29 ·cited 11×
  Plaintiffs who successfully invalidated a racially gerrymandered congressional district are prevailing parties entitled to attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 against state defendants, notwithstanding their subsequent objections to the legislature's remedial plan. Good faith, la
• Domegan v. Ponte
  972 F.2d 401· 1st Cir.· 1992-08-10 ·cited 11×
• Introcaso v. Cunningham
  857 F.2d 965· 4th Cir.· 1988-09-27 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the award of attorney's fees against the plaintiff under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, but vacated the Rule 11 sanctions against counsel and remanded for further findings.
• Almodovar v. Ira Reiner
  832 F.2d 1138· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-17 ·cited 11×
  The district court properly abstained under the Pullman doctrine but erred in dismissing the case; jurisdiction should be retained pending state court resolution.
• Webb v. Cnty. Bd. OF Educ. OF Dyer Cnty.
  715 F.2d 254· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-29 ·cited 11×
  Attorney's fees are not recoverable under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for services rendered in optional state administrative proceedings when exhaustion of those remedies is not required.
• Estes v. Tuscaloosa Cnty.
  696 F.2d 898· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 11×·via Claim For Attorney'S Fees Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988
  Section 1988 does not provide a cause of action for attorney's fees to a party who prevailed in state administrative proceedings but cannot establish an independent claim for relief under section 1983.
• Marion v. Barrier
  694 F.2d 229· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-03 ·cited 11×
  A district court is not required to enhance attorney's fees for a contingency fee arrangement, and may limit fees to hours spent on successful issues.
• Ladies Ctr. v. Thone
  645 F.2d 645· 8th Cir.· 1981-04-09 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the district court's award of attorney fees, finding no abuse of discretion in the reduction of requested hours or the disallowance of certain expenses.
• Common Cause Georgia v. Sec'y, State of Ga.
  17 F.4th 102· 11th Cir.· 2021-10-28 ·cited 10×
  A party obtaining a temporary restraining order that materially alters the legal relationship and provides merits-based relief is a prevailing party entitled to attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.