Civil Rights Attorney'S Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988)

148 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Weisenberger v. Huecker
  593 F.2d 49· 6th Cir.· 1979-02-27 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976 applies to pending cases and allows for attorney's fees for time spent litigating fee awards.
• Davis v. Murphy
  587 F.2d 362· 7th Cir.· 1978-11-22 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no clear error in its factual determinations and awarding attorney's fees for appellate work.
• Miller v. LOS Angeles Cnty. Bd. of Educ. & Stuart E. Gothold
  827 F.2d 617· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-09 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court applied incorrect legal standards in awarding attorney's fees and calculating the amount, and that the appeal of the denial of sanctions was untimely.
• Carreras v. City OF Anaheim
  768 F.2d 1039· 9th Cir.· 1985-08-13 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the City of Anaheim cannot constitutionally prohibit ISKCON from soliciting donations on the walkways outside the convention center and stadium, and that the city's solicitation ordinance is facially unconstitutional.
• Reel v. Ark. Dep't OF Corr.
  672 F.2d 693· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-17 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the plaintiff's success on minor tort claims did not qualify him as a prevailing party for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and remanded constitutional claims for further consideration.
• Universal Amusement Co., Inc. v. Hofheinz
  616 F.2d 202· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-01 ·cited 31×
  The court held that attorney's fees are awardable under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 to prevailing parties in civil rights actions, and that damages claims against certain city officials were barred by immunity.
• Jannie Hall and Guardian Ad Litem for Charles Hall v. Borough OF Roselle
  747 F.2d 838· 3d Cir.· 1984-11-02 ·cited 30×
  The court held that an upward adjustment to attorney's fees for the contingent nature of the fee or perceived case difficulty was not justified when liability was clear and no specific hurdles were demonstrated.
• Fulps v. The City OF Springfield
  715 F.2d 1088· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-25 ·cited 30×
  A petition for attorney's fees filed eight months after judgment is not necessarily untimely if governed by the equitable doctrine of laches, and the term 'costs' in a Rule 68 offer of judgment includes attorney's fees in civil rights actions.
• Hilary Davis v. Page
  618 F.2d 374· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-06 ·cited 30×
• Bowers v. Kraft Foods Corp.
  606 F.2d 816· 8th Cir.· 1979-10-04 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the discrimination claims but reversed the award of attorney's fees to the employer.
• Hamilton v. Daley
  777 F.2d 1207· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while the plaintiff's suit was frivolous and defendants were entitled to fees, the district court failed to adequately determine if all hours billed were reasonably expended in light of the frivolous nature of the claims. The court remanded for further finding
• O'Neil v. City OF Lake Oswego
  642 F.2d 367· 9th Cir.· 1981-04-20 ·cited 28×
  A judge acting in excess of jurisdiction, but not in the clear absence of all jurisdiction, is protected by judicial immunity from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Attorney's fees awards require specific findings of fact and conclusions of law.
• Turner v. McMAHON
  830 F.2d 1003· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-16 ·cited 24×
  A state is authorized under 42 U.S.C. § 602(a)(22) to recoup AFDC overpayments made to recipients under compulsion of an erroneous court order that was subsequently reversed.
• Phiffer v. Proud Parrot Motor Hotel, Inc.
  648 F.2d 548· 9th Cir.· 1980-11-24 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a prima facie case of racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1982 was established, and that the discriminatory conduct of a rental agent is attributable to the owner. The court also affirmed compensatory damages but remanded for reconsideration of attorney's
• Crooker v. Env't Prot. Agency
  763 F.2d 16· 1st Cir.· 1985-05-29 ·cited 22×
  The Equal Access to Justice Act does not authorize an award of attorney's fees to a pro se litigant.
• Espino v. Besteiro
  708 F.2d 1002· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-05 ·cited 22×
  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
• Littlefield v. Deland
  641 F.2d 729· 10th Cir.· 1981-05-12 ·cited 22×
  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×
  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×
  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
• Foley v. City OF Lowell
  948 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1991-10-23 ·cited 21×
  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.
• 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.
• McDONALD v. DOE
  748 F.2d 1055· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-20 ·cited 19×
  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.
• Swanson v. Elmhurst Chrysler Plymouth, Inc.
  882 F.2d 1235· 7th Cir.· 1989-08-16 ·cited 18×
  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.
• Ekanem v. The Health & Hosp. Corp. OF Marion Cnty.
  778 F.2d 1254· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-05 ·cited 18×
  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.
• Chesny v. Marek
  720 F.2d 474· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-03 ·cited 18×
  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×
  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.
• Harbulak v. Cnty. OF Suffolk
  654 F.2d 194· 2d Cir.· 1981-07-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying attorney's fees to the prevailing defendant because the civil rights action brought was frivolous and without foundation.
• Etta B. Saunders v. Claytor
  629 F.2d 596· 9th Cir.· 1980-10-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that an inflation factor adjustment to back pay is barred by sovereign immunity, and attorneys' fees should only be awarded for the case in which the plaintiff prevailed.
• Corder v. Gates
  947 F.2d 374· 9th Cir.· 1991-10-16 ·cited 17×
  A district court may not reduce an attorney's fee award simply because the plaintiff did not prevail against all named defendants when the claims are related and the plaintiff achieved substantial relief.
• In re Kansas Congressional Districts Reapportionment Cases. Pat O'Sullivan v. Brier
  745 F.2d 610· 10th Cir.· 1984-10-05 ·cited 17×
  The court held that plaintiffs were prevailing parties entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and that the fees awarded were reasonable, but remanded for determination of additional fees for the appeal.
• Friedrich v. City OF Chicago & Fred Rice
  888 F.2d 511· 7th Cir.· 1989-10-31 ·cited 16×
  The Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. § 1988, allows for the recovery of expert witness fees as part of costs, even though the statute literally refers only to 'attorney's fees'. This interpretation is based on the Act's purpose to restore pre-Alyeska equ
• Cooper v. Singer
  689 F.2d 929· 10th Cir.· 1982-09-30 ·cited 16×
  A contingent fee agreement does not bar recovery of attorney's fees under § 1988, and the agreed-upon fee does not constitute the maximum allowable fee.
• KEY Buick Co. v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  613 F.2d 1306· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. § 1988, does not allow attorney's fees for a taxpayer who initiates proceedings against the government, but only when the government is the initiating party in litigation.
• Annabel Stoddard v. Sch. Dist. NO. 1
  590 F.2d 829· 10th Cir.· 1979-01-05 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a school district could be liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for the actions of its Board of Trustees, and that a jury's finding of bad faith and constitutionally impermissible reasons for non-renewal, despite a general verdict against individual defendants, could
• Talbott v. Am. Isuzu Motors, Inc.
  934 So. 2d 643· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-08-02 ·cited 15×
  Vicky Talbott appealed a trial court's award of attorney's fees and costs to defendant Isuzu Motors under Florida's offer of judgment statute, arguing that the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act preempts the state statute. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that no co
• Denny v. Westfield State Coll.
  880 F.2d 1465· 1st Cir.· 1989-07-25 ·cited 15×
  Prevailing parties under Title VII cannot recover expert witness fees beyond the statutory limits set by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1821 and 1920, as Title VII's fee-shifting provision does not explicitly authorize such recovery.
• Alain Scofield v. City OF Hillsborough
  862 F.2d 759· 9th Cir.· 1988-12-07 ·cited 15×
  Due process does not require pre-towing notice for vehicles unregistered for over a year, but a post-towing hearing may be constitutionally required if timely requested and denied.
• Solomon v. City OF Gainesville
  796 F.2d 1464· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-19 ·cited 15×
  A plaintiff who prevails on a constitutional claim, even if a related § 1983 claim is waived, is entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Collins v. Chandler Unified Sch. Dist.
  644 F.2d 759· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-04 ·cited 15×
  The court held that allowing student-led prayer at school assemblies violates the Establishment Clause, but a parent who successfully sues on behalf of their child is a prevailing party eligible for attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Staten v. Hous. Auth. OF THE City OF Pittsburgh
  638 F.2d 599· 3d Cir.· 1980-11-25 ·cited 14×
  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
• David v. Travisono
  621 F.2d 464· 1st Cir.· 1980-05-16 ·cited 14×
  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×
  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×
  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×
  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.
• Gilbert v. The City OF Little Rock
  867 F.2d 1063· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-27 ·cited 12×
  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.
• Vasquez v. Patrolman Robert Fleming
  617 F.2d 334· 3d Cir.· 1980-02-13 ·cited 12×
  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.
• Lani Moore v. Dist. OF Columbia
  907 F.2d 165· D.C. Cir.· 1990-06-19 ·cited 10×
  The Handicapped Children’s Protection Act (HCPA) authorizes courts to award attorney fees to parents who prevail in administrative proceedings under the Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA).
• The People OF the State OF NEW York v. 11 Cornwell Co.
  718 F.2d 22· 2d Cir.· 1983-09-16 ·cited 10×
  A state that prevails as a plaintiff in a lawsuit brought pursuant to a federal civil rights statute is eligible for an award of attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Owens-El v. Warden William Robinson and James Jennings Appeal of Kenneth Owens-El
  694 F.2d 941· 3d Cir.· 1982-12-09 ·cited 10×
  A pro se litigant, even if successful in a civil rights action, cannot recover attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Price v. Norbert Pelka
  690 F.2d 98· 6th Cir.· 1982-10-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a district judge has discretion to deny attorney's fees to a prevailing plaintiff in a civil rights case if the plaintiff engaged in inequitable conduct, such as perjury.