Carrington v. Slayton Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Public Court Documents
January 1, 1974
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Coulter v. Tennessee Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1987. b1219c78-ae9a-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/b1cb3dec-4be6-428b-a905-979723979516/coulter-v-tennessee-petition-for-writ-of-certiorari-to-the-us-court-of-appeals-for-the-sixth-circuit. Accessed April 06, 2025.
Copied!
No.
IN THE
S u p r e m e C o u r t o f tt)e ® n ite b s t a t e s
October Term, 1986
Mary Lucille Coulter,
Petitioner,
v.
State of Tennessee, et a l ,
Respondents.
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Barry Goldstein*
806 15th Street, N.W.
Suite 940
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 638-3278
Robert Belton
do Harvard Law School
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
(617) 495-3124
Julius LeVonne Chambers
Charles Stephen Ralston
Eric Schnapper
99 Hudson Street
Sixteenth Floor
New York, New York 10013
Attorneys for Petitioner Coulter.
*(Counsel of Record)
PRESS OF BYRON S. ADAMS, WASHINGTON, D.C. (202) 347-8203
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1 . Did the c o u r t o f a p p e a ls e r r in
h o l d i n g t h a t u n d e r t h e f e e - s h i f t i n g
p r o v i s i o n i n T i t l e V I I o f t h e C i v i l
R i g h t s A c t o f 19 64 an a t t o r n e y must
r e c e i v e l e s s than the market r a t e f o r h i s
o r h e r s e r v i c e s i f the a p p e l l a t e c o u r t
b e l i e v e s a m e r e l y c o m p e t e n t a t t o r n e y
c o u l d have been h i r e d f o r l e s s ?
2. Did the c o u r t o f a p p e a ls e r r in
a p p ly in g an a r b i t r a r y p e r c e n t a g e l i m i t on
t h e number o f com pensable h ou rs , 3% o f
the hours d e v o t e d t o o t h e r i s s u e s , spent
in c o l l e c t i n g f e e s pursuant t o the f e e -
s h i f t i n g p r o v i s i o n o f T i t l e V II?
i
3. Did the c o u r t o f a p p e a ls adopt
a s ta n d a rd o f r e v ie w which c o n f l i c t s w ith
t h i s C o u r t ' s s t a n d a r d r e q u i r i n g a
" c o n c i s e but c l e a r " e x p l a n a t i o n f o r a f e e
a w a r d when i t a f f i r m e d a s i g n i f i c a n t
r e d u c t i o n i n a r e q u e s t f o r a t t o r n e y ' s
f e e s m ere ly b eca u se i t d id "n o t b e l i e v e
t h e D i s t r i c t Court a c t e d a r b i t r a r i l y or
i r r a t i o n a l l y ?
PARTIES
The p a r t i e s a re the p l a i n t i f f , Mary
L u c i l l e C o u l t e r , and t h e d e f e n d a n t s ,
S t a t e o f T e n n e s s e e , D e p a r t m e n t o f
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f the S t a t e o f T enn essee ,
Department o f P e rson n e l o f the S t a t e o f
T e n n e s s e e , a n d D a r r e l l D. A k i n s ,
C o m m i s s i o n e r o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f
P e r s o n n e l .
-iii-
T a b le o f C ontents
Page
Q u e s t io n s P re se n te d ............................. i
P a r t i e s .............................................. i i i
Tab le o f A u t h o r i t i e s ............................. v i
O p in ion s B e lo w ........................ 2
J u r i s d i c t i o n ................................................. 3
S t a t u t e I n v o l v e d . . ................................... 3
STATEMENT OF CASE..................................... 4
A. The S u c c e s s f u l R epresen
t a t i o n o f Ms. C o u l t e r by
A t t o r n e y s B e l t o n and
A r t h u r ........................ 4
B. * The Award o f A t t o r n e y ' s
F e e s ...................................... .. . 9
REASONS FOR GRANTING THE W R I T . . . . 16
I . THE SIXTH CIRCUIT'S DECISION
CONFLICTS WITH DECISIONS OF
OTHER APPELLATE COURTS WITH
RESPECT TO THE DETERMINATION
-iv-
Page
OF HOURLY RATES AND COMPENSA
BLE HOURS............................................ 2 2
A. Hourly R a t e s ........................ 22
B. Compensable H ou rs ............ 33
I I . THE SIXTH CIRCUIT DECISION
CONFLICTS WITH THIS COURT'S
STANDARDS FOR DETERMINING
"REASONABLE" ATTORNEY'S
FEES AND RAISES IMPORTANT
QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICA
TION OF MORE THAN 100
STATUTES PROVIDING FOR
ATTORNEY'S FEES TO PREVAIL
ING PARTIES....................................... 36
I I I . THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FAILED TO
PROVIDE THE NECESSARY CAREFUL
REVIEW OF ATTORNEY'S FEES
DECISIONS REQUIRED BY HENSLEY
AND BLUM.................................. .. 51
CONCLUSION..................................................... 58
-v-
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
C a s e s : Pages
A lbem arle Paper Co. v . Moody,
422 U.S. 405 (1975) .......... .. 6, 53
Bazemore v . F r id a y , 92 L .E d .2d
315 (1986) ......................................... 55-56
Bhandari v . F i r s t N a t io n a l
Bank o f Commerce, 808 F .2d
1082 (5 th C i r . 1987) ................. 29-30
B lack G r ieva n ce Committee v .
P h i l a d e l p h i a E l e c t r i c C o . ,
802 F .2d 648 (3d C i r . 1 9 8 6 ) . . 24
Blum v . S ten son , 465 U.S. 886
(1984) ................................................... passim
B r a n t le y v . S u r l e s , 804 F .2d
321 (5 th C i r . 1986) 29, 51
C i t y o f D e t r o i t v . G r i n n e l l
C o r p . , 495 F .2d 448 (2d
C i r . 1974) .......................................... 26
C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e v . R iv e r a ,
91 L . Ed.2d 466 (1986) ............ 2 8 ,3 7 ,
40
-vi-
Cases Pages
Cunningham v . C i t y o f
McKeesport, 807 F .2d 49
(3d C i r . 1986) ............................... 58
Daly v . H i l l , 790 F .2d 1071
(4 th C i r . 1986) ............................. 51
Green v . F r a n c i s , 705 F .2d 846
(6 th C i r . 1983) ............................. 11
G r igg s v . Duke Power C o . , 401
U.S. 424 (1971) ............................. 6
Hensley v . E ck er h a rt , 461 U.S.
424 (1983 ) .................... .. passim
In re Nucorp Energy, I n c . ,
764 F .2d 655 (9 th C i r . 1 9 85 ) . 36
Johnson v . G eorg ia Highway
E xp ress , I n c . , 488 F .2d 714
(1974) 2 9 -30 ,
46
Johnson v . S t a t e o f M i s s i s s i p p i ,
606 F .2d 635 (5 th C i r . 1 9 7 9 ) . 35
Jones v . MacMillan B lo e d e l
C o n t a i n e r s , I n c . , 685 F .2d
236 (8 th C i r . 1982) ................... 35
K e l l e y v . M e t r o p o l i t a n County
Board o f E d u ca t ion , 773 F .2d
677 (1985) (en banc) ................. 11
-vii-
Cases: Pages
L a f f e y v . Northwest A i r l i n e s ,
I n c . , 746 F . 2d4 (D.C. C i r .
1984) ( en b a n c ) , c e r t .
d e n i e d , 469 U.S. 1181
(1985) ................................................... 18, 24
Lenard v . A rg e n to , 808 F .2d
1242 (7 th C i r . 1987) ................. 27, 58
Lenihan v . C i t y o f New York,
640 F .Supp. 822 (S .D .N .Y .
1986) ...................................................... 27-28
L o v e l l v . C i t y o f Kankakee,
783 F .2d 95 (7 th C i r . 1 9 8 6 ) . . 35
Lund v . A f f l e c k , 578 F .2d 75
( 1st C ir . 1978) ........................ .. . 35
Marcia v . Pagan, 698 F .2d 38
( 1 s t 1983) .................................... 24
Mayson v . P i e r c e , 806 F .2d 1556
(1 1 th C i r . 1987) ................. .. 19, 32
Nisby v . Commissioners Court o f
Johnson County, 798 F .2d 134
(5 th C i r . 1986) ............................. 29, 58
Pawlak v . Greenawald, 713 F .2d
972 (3d C i r . 1 9 8 3 ) , c e r t .
d e n i e d , 104 S. C t . 707
(1984) ................................................... 25, 45
-viii-
Cases: Pages
P e n n sy lv a n ia v . Delaware V a l l e y
C i t i z e n s C o u n c i l , 92 L .E d .2d
439 ( 1986) .................................... .. 1 7 ,4 7 ,
49-50
P ra n d in i v . N a t io n a l Tea C o . ,
585 F .2d 47 (3d C i r . 1 9 7 8 ) . . . 34
Ramos v . Lamm, 713 F .2d 546
( 10th C i r . 1983) ........................ . 26
Sims v . J e f f e r s o n Downs Racing
A s s o c i a t i o n , 778 F .2d 1068
(5 th C i r . 1985) ............................. 30
S ou th eas t Legal D efense Group
v . Adams, 657 F .2d 1118 (9 th
C i r . 1981) ......................................... 35
S t a n fo r d D a i ly v . Z u rch er ,
64 F .R .D . 680 (N.D. Cal .
1974) ..................................................... 45
White v . C i t y o f Richmond,
713 F .2d 458 (9 th C i r .
1983) ......................................... .. 26
Wildman v . Lerner S t o r e s C o r p . ,
771 F .2d 605 (1 s t C i r . 1 985 ) . 24, 51
-ix-
Other Authorities: Pages
28 U .S .C . § 1254 (1 ) .........................
T i t l e VII o f the C i v i l R ig h ts
Act o f 1964 (as amended
1 972 ) , 42 U .S .C . §§ 2000e
e t s e q . .................................................
S. Rep. No. 94-1011 (1976) . . . .
H.R. Rep. No. 94-1558 (1976) . .
J . J on es , W. Murphy, and
R. B e l t o n , Cases and
M a t e r i a l s on D i s c r i m i
n a t i o n in Employment
(5 th e d . West 1987) ................. ..
3
passim
31
37
6
-x-
IN THE
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
O ctob er Term, 1986
MARY LUCILLE COULTER,
P e t i t i o n e r ,
STATE OF TENNESSEE, e t a l . ,
R e sp o n d e n ts .
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
P e t i t i o n e r Mary L u c i l l e C o u l t e r
prays th a t a w r i t o f c e r t i o r a r i i s s u e t o
rev iew the judgment o f the United S t a t e s
C o u r t o f A p p e a l s f o r the S ix t h C i r c u i t
e n t e r e d on O ctob er 29, 1986.
OPINIONS BELOW
The d e c i s i o n o f the c o u r t o f a p p e a ls
i s r e p o r t e d a t 805 F . 2d 146 and i s s e t
out a t pp. 5 a -40a o f the Appendix . The
o r d e r d e n y i n g r e h e a r i n g , w h i c h i s not
r e p o r t e d , i s s e t out a t pp. l a - 2 a . The
d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s a g r e e d memorandum o f
d e c i s i o n o f August 3, 1984, which i s not
r e p o r t e d , i s s e t out a t pp. 50a-56a o f
t h e A p p e n d i x . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s
memorandum o f d e c i s i o n , which i s a l s o not
r e p o r t e d , r e g a r d i n g t h e a w a r d o f
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s , d a ted November 5, 1984,
i s s e t out a t pp. 41a-4 8 a .
2
JURISDICTION
The judgment o f the c o u r t o f a p p e a ls
was e n t e r e d on O c t o b e r 29 , 1986 . A
t i m e l y p e t i t i o n f o r r e h e a r i n g and
s u g g e s t i o n f o r r e h e a r i n g en b a n c was
d e n i e d by an e v e n l y d i v i d e d c o u r t on
December 18 , 1986 . On March 9, 1987,
J u s t i c e S c a l i a e n t e r e d an o r d e r e x t e n d in g
the t ime f o r f i l i n g t h i s p e t i t i o n u n t i l
A p r i l 17, 1 9 87 . J u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e
C o u r t i s i n v o k e d u n d e r 28 U . S . C . §
.1254(1) .
STATUTE INVOLVED
S e c t i o n 706(k) o f T i t l e VII o f the
1964 C i v i l R ig h t s A c t , 42 U. S. C. § 2G00e-
5 ( k ) , p r o v i d e s :
I n a n y a c t i o n o r
p r o c e e d i n g under t h i s
t i t l e t h e c o u r t , in
i t s d i s c r e t i o n , may
a l l o w the p r e v a i l i n g
p a r t y , o t h e r than the
C o m m i s s i o n o r t h e
U n i t e d S t a t e s , a
3
r e a s o n a b le a t t o r n e y ' s
f e e as p a r t o f t h e
c o s t s , a n d t h e
C o m m i s s i o n and t h e
U n i t e d S t a t e s s h a l l
be l i a b l e f o r c o s t s
the same as a p r i v a t e
p e r s o n .
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
A . The S u c c e s s f u l R e p r e s e n t a t i o n
o f Ms. C o u l t e r by A t t o r n e y s
B e l t o n and A r t h u r .
P l a i n t i f f C o u l t e r r e c e i v e d a
d e t e r m i n a t i o n from the Equal Employment
O p p o r t u n i t y Commission th a t t h e r e i s no
r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t o b e l i e v e t h a t h e r
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n c h a r g e was t r u e . S ix t h
C i r c u i t App. 1 1 7 . 1 A f t e r r e c e i v i n g the
a d v e r s e d e t e r m i n a t i o n Ms. C o u l t e r
r e q u e s t e d an a t t o r n e y , A l e t a A rthur , t o
f i l e a c i v i l a c t i o n o n h e r b e h a l f
a l l e g i n g t h a t t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f
1 " S i x t h C i r c u i t A pp ." r e f e r s t o
the a ppend ix which was f i l e d b e f o r e the
U n i t e d S t a t e s Court o f A ppea ls f o r the
S ix t h C i r c u i t in the a ppea l o f t h i s c a s e .
4
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f the S t a t e o f Tennessee
i n t e n t i o n a l l y d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t her
on the b a s i s o f her. gender in v i o l a t i o n
o f T i t l e VII o f the C i v i l R ig h ts Act o f
1964, 42 U. S. C. § 2000e e t s e q . , when she
was d e n ie d a p rom ot ion t o the p o s i t i o n o f
R e g io n a l O f f i c e Manager.
Ms. A r t h u r had n e v e r " t r i e d an
employment c a s e . " T h e r e f o r e , she agreed
t o the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f Ms. C o u l t e r o n ly
a f t e r R obert B e l t o n c o n s e n te d t o s e r v e as
c o - c o u n s e l . S ix t h C i r c u i t App. 202. Mr.
B e l t o n , has more th a n t w e n t y y e a r s o f
f a i r em ploym ent l i t i g a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e ,
taught equal employment law a t V a n d e r b i l t
Law S ch o o l when Ms. Arthur was a s tu d en t
a t the s c h o o l , and has "been i n v o l v e d in
more t h a n 250 employment d i s c r i m i n a t i o n
c a s e s t h r o u g h o u t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s as
c h i e f c o u n s e l o r c o - c o u n s e l [ i n c l u d i n g ]
5
G r i g g s v . Duke Power Co. , 401 U.S. 424
( 1 9 7 1 ) [ a n d ] A l b e m a r l e P a p e r Co. v .
M o o d y , 422 U. S . 405 ( 1 9 7 5 ) . . . . " S ix t h
C i r c u i t App. 1 2 9 . 2
T h e p l a i n t i f f ' s p r o o f o f
i n t e n t i o n a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n w a s
e s t a b l i s h e d i n a c a r e f u l l y d e v e l o p e d
ma n n e r w h i c h r e f l e c t e d Mr. B e l t o n ' s
e x p e r i e n c e . The i s s u e was f o c u s e d by the
f i l i n g o f a summary judgment m otion which
" sh o w e d t h a t h i s c l i e n t had made out a
p r im a f a c i e em ploy m en t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n
c a s e and th a t the s t a t e had f a i l e d t o
come forw ard w ith a v a l i d rea son f o r the
f a i l u r e t o p r o m o t e t h e p l a i n t i f f . . . . "
̂ M r . B e l t o n h a s a u t h o r e d
numerous law r e v i e w a r t i c l e s about the
f a i r em ploy m en t la w s , and r e c e n t l y c o
a u t h o r e d a t e x t b o o k on e m p l o y m e n t
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l i t i g a t i o n . J . J on es ,
W. Mu r p h y , a n d R. B e l t o n , C a s e s and
M a t e r i a l s on D i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n Employment
( 5 t h ed . West 1987) .
6
App. 25a. As a r e s u l t o f the m otion the
s t a t e had t o f i l e an amended p l e a d in g " t o
a l l e g e a j u s t i f i c a t i o n . " Id ■ Having
a s c e r t a i n e d t h e a s s e r t e d l e g i t i m a t e
n o n d i s c r i m i n a t o r y r e a s o n the p l a i n t i f f
f i l e d d i s c o v e r y , i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s ,
r e q u e s t s f o r a d m is s io n , and d e p o s i t i o n s ,
which p r o g r e s s i v e l y narrowed the q u e s t i o n
and p e r m it t e d the p l a i n t i f f " t o show that
the j u s t i f i c a t i o n the s t a t e advanced was
a p r e t e x t . " I d .
F o l l o w i n g t h e d i s c o v e r y "Mr.
B e l to n p rep a red e x t e n s i v e s t i p u l a t i o n s o f
f a c t , based in major p a r t on answers t o
p r e v i o u s i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s he had p re p a re d ,
a n d a n a b l e t r i a l b r i e f . H i s
c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e c a s e and h i s
s t i p u l a t i o n s and b r i e f c o n t r i b u t e d t o a
s u c c e s s f u l o u t c o m e . . . . " App. 26a-27a .
At t r i a l p l a i n t i f f C o u l t e r d i d n o t
7
p r e s e n t a s i n g l e w i t n e s s b u t r a t h e r
r e l i e d u p o n t h e w r i t t e n w o r k ,
s t i p u l a t i o n s a n d p r e - t r i a l b r i e f ,
p rep a red by Mr. B e l t o n . The d e fe n d a n ts
p r e s e n t e d t h r e e w i t n e s s e s , App. 51a, and
the t r i a l l a s t e d " l e s s than h a l f a d a y , "
App. 43a.
" A t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e
p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the d e f e n d a n t s ' c a s e , the
Court r u l e d from the bench . . . th a t the
p l a i n t i f f ha d c a r r i e d h e r b u r d e n o f
p r o v i n g . . . t h a t d e f e n d a n t s h a d
d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t the p l a i n t i f f on
t h e b a s i s o f h e r s e x , i n v i o l a t i o n o f
T i t l e VI I o f t h e C i v i l R i g h t s A c t o f
1964 . " 5 1 a -5 2 a . The c o u r t o r d e r e d the
p rom ot ion o f Ms. C o u l t e r t o a m anager ia l
p o s i t i o n , the payment o f back pay and the
award o f "comp t i m e . " App. 53a -5 4 a .
8
B . The Award o f A t t o r n e y ' s F e e s .
Mr. B e l t o n su b m it ted a p e t i t i o n
f o r f e e s r e q u e s t i n g c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r
1 8 5 . 5 9 h o u rs a t an h o u r ly r a t e o f $110
per hour f o r 1982 and $125 per hour f o r
1983 and 1 9 8 4 .3 S ix t h C i r c u i t App. 124-
2 5 . B e l t o n s u b m i t t e d p r e c i s e t i m e
r e c o r d s and s i x a f f i d a v i t s s u p p o r t in g the
r e a s o n a b l e n e s s o f h i s r e q u e s t f o r f e e s .
F o r e x a m p l e , Mr. L a w r e n c e A s h e who
r e g u l a r l y r e p r e s e n t s d e fen d a n t companies
in employment d i s c r i m i n a t i o n c a s e s i n the
F e d e r a l C o u r t s i n T e n n e s s e e t e s t i f i e d
t h a t " B e l t o n has b e e n a p i o n e e r and a
l e a d i n g s p e c i a l i s t i n t h e f i e l d o f
employment d i s c r i m i n a t i o n [ , th a t he] i s
one o f a l i t e r a l h a n d f u l o f t h e most
3 The d e f e n d a n t s s e t t l e d any
c l a i m by Ms. C o u l t e r f o r f e e s f o r the
p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s o f Ms, A r t h u r .
App. 55a.
9
h i g h l y - r e g a r d e d employment d i s c r i m i n a t i o n
a t t o r n e y s f o r p l a i n t i f f s in the United
S t a t e s , " and t h a t B e l t o n ' s r e q u e s t e d
r a t e s " a r e e n t i r e l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h what
I would e x p e c t t o s e e p a id in N a s h v i l l e
f o r a n a t t o r n e y o f . . . B e l t o n ' s
r e p u t a t i o n and a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s . . , . " I d .
1 6 6 - 6 7 . 4
Mr. B a r n e t t , who has p r a c t i c e d
in N a s h v i l l e , T e n n e s s e e , f o r 30 y e a r s ,
t e s t i f i e d t h a t h e i s " i n t i m a t e l y
f a m i l i a r " w i t h t h e f e e s c h a r g e d by
l a w y e r s i n em ploym ent d i s c r i m i n a t i o n ,
c i v i l r i g h t s , and r e l a t e d ty p es o f c a s e s
and th a t B e l t o n ' s r e q u e s t f o r " f e e s [ i s ]
r e a s o n a b le and c e r t a i n l y r e p r e s e n t s ] the
p r e v a i l i n g market r a t e i n t h i s community
[ a nd ] i s b e l o w some N a s h v i l l e la w y e r s '
f e e s c h e d u le f o r t h i s o r s i m i l a r ty pe o f
w o r k . " S ix t h C i r c u i t App. 1 61-62 .
Leroy D. C la rk , a law p r o f e s s o r
at C a t h o l i c U n i v e r s i t y S ch o o l o f Law, who
s e r v e d a s G e n e r a l Counsel o f the Equal
Employment O p p o r t u n i t y Commission from
1978 t o 1980 t e s t i f i e d th a t he " s u p p o r te d
t h e g r a n t o f t e n u r e [by V a n d e r b i l t Law
S ch o o l t o B e l t o n ] on the grounds th a t he
was one o f the most c o n s i s t e n t s c h o l a r l y
c o n t r i b u t o r s i n t h [ e ] a r e a o f " f a i r
employment law. I d . 153 -54 . The o t h e r
10
T h e o n l y c o u n t e r - e v i d e n c e
s u b m i t t e d by Tennessee was an a f f i d a v i t
o f a s t a t e o f f i c i a l s t a t i n g t h a t
T e n n e s s e e p a i d c o u n s e 1 r e p r e s e n t i n g
T e n n e s s e e l e s s t h a n t h e h o u r l y r a t e
r e q u e s t e d by B e l t o n , S ix t h C i r c u i t App.
1 8 9 - 9 0 . I n i t s b r i e f T e n n e s s e e
r e p r e s e n t e d t h a t i t had " a g reed t o pay
t h r e e a f f i a n t s s i m i l a r l y t e s t i f i e d about
the r e a s o n a b le n e s s o f the f e e r e q u e s t s o r
Mr. B e l t o n ' s e x p e r i e n c e o r b o t h . I d .
13 9 -5 1 ; 15 8 -6 0 .
M o r e o v e r , i n o t h e r d e c i s i o n s
the S ix t h C i r c u i t has r e c o g n i z e d that the
r a t e s r e q u e s t e d b y Mr. B e l t o n w e r e
r e a s o n a b l e f o r an e x p e r i e n c e d a t t o r n e y .
K e l l e y v . M e t r o p o l i t a n County Board o f
E d u c a t i o n ,. 773 F. 2d 677, 683 (1985) ( en
b a n c ) (An a t t o r n e y in N a s h v i l l e who i s
s k i l l e d and e x p e r i e n c e d in c i v i l r i g h t s
w ork i s e n t i t l e d t o "a minimum r a t e o f
$120 p e r h o u r " ) ; Green v. F r a n c i s , 705
F . 2d 8 4 6 , 8 50 ( 6 t h C i r . 1983) ( "Two
r e p u t a b l e m em b ers o f t h e N a s h v i l l e ,
T e n n e s s e e b a r f i l e d a f f i d a v i t s . . .
s t a t [ i n g ] t h a t i t i s not unusual among
l e a d i n g members o f the N a s h v i l l e Bar t o
c h a r g e a f e e ra ng ing from $150 t o $200
per hour f o r b o th o f f i c e and courtroom work. ")
11
[Ms. A r t h u r ] " an h o u r ly r a t e o f $85 per
h o u r a n d " [ t ] o s e t a h i g h e r r a t e o f
c o m p e n s a t i o n " f o r Mr. B e l t o n " w o u ld
c r e a t e a w i n d f a l l " f o r h i m . S i x t h
C i r c u i t App. 181.
The d i s t r i c t c o u r t red u ced Mr.
B e l t o n ' s r e q u e s t e d f e e by about 40% from
a p p r o x i m a t e l y $2 2 ,0 00 t o $ 1 4 ,0 0 0 . App.
43a, 49a. The d i s t r i c t c o u r t r e f u s e d to
c o m p e n s a t e Mr. B e l t o n f o r a p p r o x im a te ly
30% o r 56 o f t h e 185 h o u r s f o r w h i c h
c o m p e n s a t i o n was r e q u e s t e d beca u se the
c o u r t c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e r e q u e s t was
" i n o r d i n a t e , " " u n r e a s o n a b l e , " "must be
d u p l i c a t e [ ] " h o u r s , l e s s t i m e was
" s u f f i c i e n t " o r the work was "a m otion in
f u t i l i t y . " App. 4 4 a -4 7 a .
12
M oreover , the c o u r t reduced the
h o u r ly r a t e r e q u e s t e d f o r 1982 from $110
t o $85 per h o u r5 and f o r 1983 and 1984
f r o m $ 1 2 5 p e r h ou r t o $110 p e r h ou r
b e c a u s e t h e c o u r t " f i n d [ s ] t h i s i s a
r e a s o n a b le f e e per hour f o r the s e r v i c e s
r e n d e r e d . . . . " App. 47a. The c o u r t made
n e i t h e r f i n d i n g s i n s u p p o r t o f t h i s
c o n c l u s i o n n o r r e f e r e n c e t o B e l t o n ' s
In p a r t , the c o u r t reduced the
h o u r l y r a t e o f $110 per hour r e q u e s t e d
f o r t h e 4 . 2 5 hours expended in 1982 t o
$85 per hour because B e l t o n had f i l e d a
p e t i t i o n i n a n o t h e r ca se r e q u e s t i n g an
h o u r ly r a t e o f $85 f o r work per form ed in
1 98 2 . A p p . 4 2 a , 4 7 a . Mr. B e l t o n
r e q u e s t e d $85 per hour in the p e r t i n e n t
c a s e on t h e b a s i s o f a bench m ark f o r
h o u r ly r a t e s s e t by the d i s t r i c t c o u r t in
th a t c a s e in 1980. B e l t o n had r e q u e s t e d
$100 per hour f o r time per form ed p r i o r to
1980 but the c o u r t o n ly awarded him $75
per hour based on e v id e n c e sub m itted by
t h e S t a t e u n d e r a " c o s t - p l u s " t h e o r y .
S i n c e t h e Supreme Court d id not r e j e c t
t h i s t h e o r y u n t i l 1984, Blum v . S t e n s o n ,
465 U. S . 8 8 6 , B e l t o n d id not c h a l l e n g e
the r a t e s e t e a r l i e r i n the c a s e . S ix t h
C i r c u i t App. 207.
13
u n d isp u te d e v id e n c e about the a p p l i c a b l e
market r a t e in N a s h v i l l e .
The , S ix t h C i r c u i t a f f i r m e d the
d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s r e d u c t i o n o f B e l t o n ' s
r e q u e s t e d h o u r l y r a t e and number o f
c o m p e n s a b l e h o u r s e x c e p t f o r the 16 .75
hours c la im e d f o r the p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the
m o t i o n f o r summary j u d g m e n t . 6 As t o
h o u r ly r a t e s the S ix t h C i r c u i t announced
a n o v e l l e g a l r u l e l i m i t i n g the h o u r ly
r a t e a w a r d e d a h i g h l y e x p e r i e n c e d ,
ren ow n ed p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y t o t h a t
com m an ded i n t h e m arket p l a c e by an
i n e x p e r i e n c e d , m ere ly competent a t t o r n e y .
App. l l a - 1 2 a , 16a-18a .
6 The S i x t h C i r c u i t r e j e c t e d the
c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e m otion f o r summary
j u d g m e n t was " a m o t i o n i n f u t i l i t y , "
b e c a u s e " t h i s p a r t i c u l a r . . . m o t i o n
a d v a n c e d Mr. B e l t o n ' s c a s e and was a
f a c t o r in w in n in g . " App. 25a.
14
The S i x t h C i r c u i t announced a
secon d n o v e l l e g a l p r i n c i p l e in r e d u c in g
Mr. B e l t o n ' s c l a i m from 13 hours t o 5
h o u r s f o r c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r work d one
l i t i g a t i n g f o r a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s . Without
q u e s t i o n i n g the a c c u r a c y 7 o f Mr. B e l t o n ' s
e x p e n d i t u r e o f 13 hours in c o l l e c t i n g h i s
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s , t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t
im posed an a r b i t r a r y num erica l l i m i t on
t h e a m o u n t o f c o m p e n s a b l e t i m e i n
l i t i g a t i n g the i s s u e o f f e e s :
In the ab sen ce o f unusual
c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e h o u r s
a l l o w e d f o r p r e p a r i n g a nd
l i t i g a t i n g t h e a t t o r n e y f e e
c a s e s h o u l d n o t e x c e e d 3% o f
the hours in the main c a s e when
t h e i s s u e i s su b m it ted on the
p a p e r s w i t h o u t a t r i a l and
s h o u l d n o t e x c e e d 5% o f t h e
hours in the main c a s e when a
t r i a l i s n e c e s s a r y .
T h e i s s u e c o n c e r n i n g
c o m p e n s a b l e h o u r s d id not " i n v o l v e . . .
p a d d i n g , m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , o r d i s h o n e s t
a c c o u n t i n g . " App. 21a.
15
App. 23a-2 4 a .
The S i x t h C i r c u i t a l s o uphe ld
t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s r e f u s a l t o
compensate B e l t o n f o r 31 o f the 62 hours
f o r which he r e q u e s t e d com p en sa t ion f o r
p r e p a r i n g the s t i p u l a t i o n s , the p r e t r i a l
b r i e f and f o r t r i a l p r e p a r a t i o n b eca u se
i t d i d " n o t b e l i e v e the D i s t r i c t Court
a c t e d a r b i t r a r i l y o r i r r a t i o n a l l y . . . . "
App. 26a.
T h e S i x t h C i r c u i t d e n i e d
C o u l t e r ' s p e t i t i o n f o r r e h e a r in g en b anc .
App. l a - 2 a .
REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT
T h i s c a s e p r e s e n t s c r i t i c a l l y
i m p o r t a n t l e g a l q u e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e
p ro p e r im plem en ta t ion o f the f e e - s h i f t i n g
s t a t u t e s . 8 The i s s u e s a r e so im portant
8 The s t a n d a r d s f o r a p p ly in g the
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e p r o v i s i o n s in c i v i l r i g h t s
c a s e s " a r e g e n e r a l l y a p p l i c a b l e in a l l
16
b e c a u s e t h e s i g n i f i c a n t 40% r e d u c t i o n
o r d e r e d b y t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t i n t h e
p l a i n t i f f ' s f e e r e q u e s t was not based on
t h e p a r t i c u l a r f a c t s o f t h i s l i t i g a t i o n
b u t r e s u l t e d f o r m t wo n o v e l l e g a l
p r i n c i p l e s w h i c h c o n f l i c t w i t h t h i s
C o u r t ' s r u l i n g s and w ith the d e c i s i o n s o f
o t h e r c o u r t s o f a p p e a l s .
1 n H e n s l e y v . E c k e r h a r t , 461 U . S .
424 ( 1 9 8 3 ) , and Blum v . S t e n s o n , 465 U.S.
8 8 6 ( 1 9 8 4 ) , t h e C o u r t e s t a b l i s h e d
c a s e s in which Congress has a u t h o r i z e d an
award o f f e e s t o a ' p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y . ' "
Hensley v . E c k e r h a r t , 461 U.S. 424, 433
n . 7 ( 1 9 8 3 ) . L a s t Term t h e s t a n d a r d s
a d o p t e d f o r c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s w ere
a p p l i e d t o § 304 o f the Clean A ir Act
and, in d o in g s o , the Court o b s e r v e d that
" [ t ] h e r e a re o v e r 100 s e p a r a t e s t a t u t e s
p r o v i d i n g f o r t h e award o f a t t o r n e y ' s
f e e s [ w h i c h ] a l t h o u g h t h e s e p r o v i s i o n s
c o v e r a w id e v a r i e t y o f . . . ca u se s o f
a c t i o n , the bench mark o f the award under
n e a r l y a l l o f t h e se s t a t u t e s i s th a t the
a t t o r n e y f e e s must be ' r e a s o n a b l e . ' "
P en n sy lv an ia v . Delaware V a l l e y C i t i z e n s
C o u n c i l , 92 L .E d .2 d 439, 453-54 ( 1 9 8 6 ) .
17
g u i d e l i n e s f o r t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s . These g u i d e l i n e s have
n o t r e s u l t e d i n t h e a n t i c i p a t e d
u n i f o r m i t y a n d p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s d e c i s i o n s .
F i r s t , the low er c o u r t s a r e in sharp
c o n f l i c t and d i s a r r a y o v e r t h e p r o p e r
m e t h o d f o r d e t e r m i n i n g a r e a s o n a b l e
h o u r ly r a t e which i s the l i n c h p i n f o r the
c a l c u l a t i o n o f a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s . S e e ,
Hensley v . E c k e r h a r t , 461 U.S. at 433.®
The S i x t h C i r c u i t r e l i e s n o t upon the
h o u r l y r a t e i n t h e m a rk et p l a c e f o r
h i g h l y e x p e r i e n c e d a t t o r n e y s but r a t h e r
e s t a b l i s h e s a l o w e r r a t e f o r t h o s e 9
9 The low er c o u r t s have d e v e l o p e d
c o n f l i c t i n g p o s i t i o n s s i n c e " t h e Supreme
Court has no t s e t out the method by which
d i s t r i c t c o u r t s a r e t o d e t e r m i n e t he
h o u r l y r a t e o f a t t o r n e y s w o r k i n g f o r
p r o f i t . " L a f f e y v . Northwest A i r l i n e s ,
74 6 F . 2 d 4 , 16 ( D . C . C i r . 1984) ( en
b a n c ) , c e r t , d e n i e d , 4 69 U. S . 1181
(1985) .
18
a t t o r n e y s i f t h e r e a r e c o m p e t e n t
a t t o r n e y s " i n the r e g i o n [who] n o rm a l ly "
r e c e i v e a l o w e r r a t e . A p p . 11a. At
l e a s t s i x o t h e r c i r c u i t s have a dop ted a
m a r k e t - b a s e d a p p r o a c h in c o n f l i c t w ith
the S i x t h C i r c u i t ' s r u l e . However, t h e s e
c i r c u i t s have a dopted f i v e d i f f e r e n t and
c o n f l i c t i n g a p p roa ch es f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g
t h e m a r k e t r a t e . On e o f t h e s e
a p p r o a c h e s , the "narrow market" r u l e o f
t h e E l e v e n t h C i r c u i t , may undercut the
e f f e c t i v e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e f e e
s t a t u t e s as much as the S ix t h C i r c u i t ' s
r u l e . 10 S e c t i o n I , A.
In Mayson v . P i e r c e , 806 F. 2d
1556 , 1556 ( 1 9 8 7 ) , the E leventh C i r c u i t
a p p r o v e d t h e p a y m e n t o f f e e s t o a
p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y a t a lower r a t e than
t h a t a t t o r n e y u s u a l l y e a r n e d when
r e p r e s e n t i n g companies beca u se T i t l e VII
p l a i n t i f f s c a n n o t a f f o r d h i g h l y p a i d
a t t o r n e y s in the market p l a c e .
19
By r e j e c t i n g t h e C o u r t ' s command
th a t f e e s " a r e t o be c a l c u l a t e d a c c o r d i n g
t o the p r e v a i l i n g market r a t e , " Blum v.
S t e n s o n , 4 6 5 U. S . a t 8 9 5 , t h e S i x t h
C i r c u i t makes a t t o r n e y s f e e s p r o c e e d i n g s
more s u b j e c t i v e and u n p r e d i c t a b l e s i n c e
t h e r e a d i l y o b t a i n a b l e e v id e n c e o f the
p r e v a i l i n g market r a t e f o r an a t t o r n e y ' s
s e r v i c e s i s no t d e t e r m i n a t i v e . M oreover ,
t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t ' s d e c i s i o n w i l l d r i v e
e x p e r i e n c e d c o u n s e l away f r o m t h e
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f c i v i l r i g h t s
p l a i n t i f f s . H ig h ly e x p e r i e n c e d a t t o r n e y s
o r members o f law f i rm s o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s
w i t h a n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e have a s t r o n g
e c o n o m i c i n c e n t i v e t o s t e e r c l e a r o f
c a s e s w i t h i n t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t and t o
s e l e c t c a s e s w i t h i n the t h r e e c i r c u i t s
which depend upon the b i l l i n g r a t e o f an
a t t o r n e y t o e s t a b l i s h r e a s o n a b le f e e s .
20
S e c t i o n I I , i n f r a .
S e c o n d , i n c o n f l i c t w i t h f i v e
c i r c u i t s , t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t l i m i t s the
com pensable hours f o r l i t i g a t i o n sp ent in
t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f f e e s t o a f l a t
p e r c e n t a g e , 3%, o f the hours d e v o t e d t o
o t h e r i s s u e s . S e c t i o n I , B, i n f r a . By
r e j e c t i n g t h e p r e s u m p t i o n t h a t a
p r e v a i l i n g p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y w i l l
"n o r m a l ly " r e c e i v e com pensat ion f o r " a l l
hours r e a s o n a b ly e x p e n d e d , " H e n s l e y , 461
U.S. a t 435, the S ix t h C i r c u i t undermines
the i n c e n t i v e f o r a t t o r n e y s t o r e p r e s e n t
c i v i l r i g h t s p l a i n t i f f s b e ca u se t h e r e i s
t h e e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t they w i l l r e c e i v e
com p ensat ion f o r a l l t h e i r work which was
r e a s o n a b ly p er form ed . S e c t i o n I I , i n f r a ■
T h ir d , in c o n f l i c t w ith the Hensley
and Blum requ irem ent and the p r a c t i c e s o f
o t h e r a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s , the S ix t h C i r c u i t
21
d i d n o t r e q u i r e t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t to
p r o v i d e a " c l e a r e x p l a n a t i o n " f o r i t s
award o f f e e s . By u p h o ld in g the award
e v e n t h o u g h t h e l o w e r c o u r t made no
f i n d i n g s t o s u p p o r t s i t s c o n c l u s o r y
s t a t e m e n t s , the S ix t h C i r c u i t f a i l e d t o
e n s u r e t h a t t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h e f e e
s t a t u t e w e r e s a t i s f i e d . S e c t i o n I I I ,
i n f r a .
I . THE SI XT H C I R C U I T ' S D E C I S I O N
CONFLICTS WITH DECISIONS OF OTHER
APPELLATE COURTS WITH RESPECT TO THE
DETERMINATION OF HOURLY RATES AND
COMPENSABLE HOURS.
A . Hourly R a t e s .
I n C o u l t e r t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t
implements the Hensley-Blum s ta n d a rd f o r
d e t e r m i n i n g a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s in a manner
w h i c h s q u a r e l y c o n f l i c t s w i t h t h e
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n by t h e o t h e r c i r c u i t s .
C ontra ry t o the S ix t h C i r c u i t , the o t h e r
c i r c u i t s d e term in e the a p p r o p r i a t e h o u r ly
22
r a t e based upon the market r a t e f o r the
s e r v i c e s o f the a t t o r n e y who r e q u e s t s the
f e e s .
I n t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t a h i g h l y
e x p e r i e n c e d l a w y e r w i l l not be awarded
h i s c u s t o m a r y h o u r ly r a t e i f t h e r e are
m ere ly com petent a t t o r n e y s " i n the r e g i o n
[who] n orm a l ly r e c e i v e " a lower r a t e and
whom t h e c o u r t d e t e r m i n e s m ig h t have
l i t i g a t e d the c a s e . App. 11a. While the
S i x t h C i r c u i t e x p l i c i t l y r e j e c t e d
r e l i a n c e upon t h e b i l l i n g r a t e o f the
p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y , t h e D i s t r i c t o f
C o lu m b ia , F i r s t and Third C i r c u i t s j u s t
a s e x p l i c i t l y h a v e r e l i e d u p o n t h e
b i l l i n g r a t e .
The D i s t r i c t o f Columbia C i r c u i t has
r u l e d t h a t " [ f ] o r l a w y e r s e n g a g e d in
customary p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e . . . the market
p l a c e has s e t [ t h e ] v a l u e " f o r t h e i r
23
s e r v i c e s . L a f f e y v . Northwest A i r l i n e s ,
I n c . , 746 F . 2d a t 18. The b i l l i n g r a t e
o f a t t o r n e y s " r e f l e c t s t h e t r a i n i n g ,
b a c k g r o u n d , and p r e v i o u s l y d em on stra ted
s k i l l o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l a t t o r n e y in
r e l a t i o n t o o t h e r l a w y e r s i n t h a t
community ." IcU In a p p ly in g the b i l l i n g
r a t e r u l e , t h e F i r s t C i r c u i t c o n c lu d e d
t h a t " [ s ] k i 11 a n d e x p e r i e n c e [ a r e a
l i t i g a t o r ’ s ] s t o c k - i n - t r a d e " a n d a
d i s t r i c t c o u r t p r o p e r l y " p a id h i s a s k in g
p r i c e . . . . " Wildman v . L e r n e r S t o r e s
C o r p . , 771 F . 2d 6 0 5 , 6 1 0 -1 1 ( 1 9 8 5 ) ; 11
s e e a l s o , B l a c k G r ie v a n c e Committee...y._
11 The F i r s t C i r c u i t ex ten ded the
b i l l i n g r a t e r u l e t o a p p l y t o t h e
" o u t s i d e s p e c i a l i s t ' s o r d i n a r y r a t e . "
Marcia v . Pagan, 698 F .2d 38, 40 ( 1 9 8 3 ) .
" I f the c o u r t s (w i th o u t ca u se ) award f e e s
a t l e s s than th a t r a t e , they w i l l tend t o
p re v e n t t h o s e in s m a l l e r communit ies from
o b t a i n i n g the e x p e r i e n c e d l e g a l c o u n s e l
t h e y may n e e d , c o n t r a r y t o t h e p o l i c y
b e h i n d a w a r d s o f a t t o r n e y s ' f e e s t o
p r e v a i l i n g p a r t i e s . "
24
P h i l a d e l p h i a E l e c t r i c C o . , 802 F . 2d 648,
652 (3d C i r . 1986) ; Pawlak v . Greenawald ,
713 F . 2d 972, 979 (3d C i r . 1983) , c e r t ,
d e n i e d , 104 S. C t . 707 ( 1 9 84 ) .
Wh i l e t h e c i r c u i t s o t h e r than the
S ix t h C i r c u i t j o i n in a p p ly in g a m arket -
based approach t o the d e t e r m in a t i o n o f an
a p p r o p r i a t e h o u r l y r a t e , t h e r e a r e
c o n f l i c t s among the c i r c u i t s as t o the
p ro p e r m a rket -b ased approach .
Two c i r c u i t s , the Ninth and Tenth,
e x p r e s s l y r e j e c t any p r i m a r y r e l i a n c e
p l a c e d u p o n t h e " b i l l i n g r a t e " f o r
d e te r m in in g a r e a s o n a b le h o u r ly r a t e .
T h e N i n t h C i r c u i t a p p r o v e d t h e
c a l c u l a t i o n o f an h o u r ly r a t e "based upon
t h a t w h ic h p r i v a t e c o u n s e l o f s i m i l a r
e x p e r i e n c e , r e p u t a t i o n , and s k i l l c o u ld
command in c a s e s o f s i m i l a r c o m p le x i t y in
t h e c o m m u n i t y " a nd t h e r e j e c t i o n o f
25
r e l i a n c e upon " t h e c o u n s e l ' s customary
h o u r ly r a t e , " White v . C i t y o f Richmond,
713 F . 2d 458, 460-61 ( 1 9 8 3 ) . The Tenth
C i r c u i t j o i n e d t h e N i n t h C i r c u i t i n
d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t " [ t ] he h o u r l y r a t e
sh o u ld be based on the l a w y e r ' s s k i l l and
e x p e r i e n c e in c i v i l r i g h t s o r a n a log ou s
l i t i g a t i o n " a n d t h a t a c o u n s e l ' s
" custom ary r a t e would be [a ] r e l e v a n t but
no t c o n c l u s i v e f a c t o r , " Ramos v . Lamm,
713 F . 2d 546, 555 {1983) .
A l t h o u g h i t h a s n o t e x p r e s s l y
r e j e c t e d p r i m a r y r e l i a n c e u p o n t h e
b i l l i n g r a t e o f an a t t o r n e y , the Second
C i r c u i t a l s o c a l c u l a t e s a r e a s o n a b le r a t e
f o r an a t t o r n e y by a com par ison w i th " th e
h o u r ly amount t o which a t t o r n e y s o f the
s k i l l i n t h e a r e a w o u ld t y p i c a l l y be
e n t i t l e d f o r a g iv e n ty pe o f w o r k . . . . "
C i t y o f D e t r o i t v . G r i n n e l l C o r p . , 495
26
F . 2d 448, 471 (2d C i r . 1974) ; s e e a l s o ,
Lenlhan v . C i t y o f New Y o r k , 640 F. Supp.
822, 827 ( S . D. N. Y. 1986) .
As d o e s t h e " b i l l i n g r a t e "
r u l e , the " s i m i l a r s k i l l " r u l e g u id e s the
c o u r t s t o the a d o p t i o n o f the market r a t e
f o r t h e s e r v i c e s o f t h e a t t o r n e y who
r e q u e s t s the award. U nl ike the C o u l t e r
" c o m p e t e n t a t t o r n e y " s ta n d a r d b o th the
" b i l l i n g r a t e " and " s i m i l a r s k i l l " r u l e s
f o c u s upon t h e s p e c i f i c e x p e r i e n c e and
s k i l l o f t h e p e t i t i o n i n g a t t o r n e y
a l t h o u g h in any g iv e n c a s e the r u l e s may
le a d t o q u i t e d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t s .
By r e l y i n g upon c o n t i n g e n c y
a r r a n g e m e n t s the Seventh C i r c u i t a d op ts
y e t a n o th er m arket -based r u l e . Lenard v .
A r q e n t o , 808 F. 2d 1242, 1247-48 ( 1 9 8 7 ) .
S in ce some t y p e s o f c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s ,
l i k e " t o r t c a s e s , " a r e " c o n v e n t i o n a l l y
27
a n d s a t i s f a c t o r i l y h a n d l e d o n a
c o n t i n g e n t b a s i s . . . the f e e s e t in the
c o n t i n g e n t f e e c o n t r a c t would have been
p r e s u m p t i v e l y a d e q u a t e t o a t t r a c t
c o m p e t e n t c o u n s e l . " I d . a t 1247. In
c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h e r e t h e c o n t i n g e n c y
a rra n g em en ts u s u a l l y r e l i e d upon in the
m a r k e t p l a c e c a n " i n d u c e " c o m p e t e n t
c o u n s e l t o r e p r e s e n t c i v i l r i g h t s
p l a i n t i f f s , then the c o u r t s sh o u ld perm it
t h e m arket p l a c e t o work and a d o p t a
c o n t i n g e n c y r a t h e r than l o d e s t a r a pproach
t o t h e c a l c u l a t i o n o f r e a s o n a b le f e e s .
Id. a t 1 2 4 7 - 4 8 . 12
The F i f t h C i r c u i t f o l l o w s y e t
another market-based rule although a
12 The Seventh C i r c u i t s t a t e d th a t
the " c o n t i n g e n c y r u l e " a dop ted in Lenard
i s n o t i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h C i t y o f
R i v e r s i d e v . R i v e r a , 91 L . E d . 2 d 466
( 1 9 8 6 ) s i n c e no J u s t i c e " s u g g e s t e d th a t
the terms o f . . . a [ c o n t i n g e n c y ] c o n t r a c t
were i r r e l e v a n t . . . . " L en a rd , 808 F .2d at
1248 .
28
panel o f the c o u r t r e c e n t l y s t a t e d , that
the " F i f t h C i r c u i t law on the s t a t u s o f
[ t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f ] Johnson [ v . G eorg ia
Highway E x p r e s s , 488 F. 2d 714 ( 5 t h C i r .
1974) , t o c a l c u l a t e r e a s o n a b le a t t o r n e y ' s
f e e s ] i s in d i s a r r a y . " Bhandari v . F i r s t
N a t io n a l Bank o f Commerce, 808 F .2d 1082,
1104 ( 5 t h C i r . 1987) . The F i f t h C i r c u i t
has h e ld th a t Blum and Hensley " d i d not
a b r o g a t e t h e r e q u i r e m e n t th a t d i s t r i c t
c o u r t s must c o n s i d e r the tw e lv e f a c t o r s
s e t down i n J o h n s o n . " B r a n t l e y v .
S u r l e s , 804 F . 2d 321, 325 ( 1 9 8 6 ) . The
c o u r t has r e v e r s e d an award o f a t t o r n e y ' s
f e e s b a s e d on a " l o d e s t a r " c a l c u l a t i o n
b e c a u s e " t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t
e v a l u a t e s p e c i f i c a l l y the a p p l i c a b i l i t y
o f each o f the Johnson f a c t o r s . " Nisby
v . Commissioners Court o f Johnson C ou n ty ,
798 F . 2d 134, 137 ( 1 9 8 6 ) . However, in
29
a n oth er d e c i s i o n t h i s s t r i c t Johnson r u l e
was n o t a p p l i e d , B r a n t l e y v . S u r l e s ,
s u p r a , and in a t l e a s t one o p i n i o n the
c o u r t a p p e a r e d t o a p p l y t h e " s i m i l a r
s k i l l " r u l e , Sims v . J e f f e r s o n Downs
R a c in g A s s o c i a t i o n , 778 F . 2d 1068, 1084
( 1 9 8 5 ) . The c i r c u i t r e c e n t l y remanded an
a t t o r n e y f e e i s s u e t o a d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o
" ma k e o f t h i s m u d d l e wh a t i t c a n . "
B h a n d a r i v . F i r s t N a t i o n a l B an k__o f
Commerce, 808 F. 2d a t 1105.
A sha red c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f the
" b i l l i n g r a t e , " " s i m i l a r s k i l l , "
" c o n t i n g e n c y , " and " J ohnson" r u l e s which
t h e c o u r t s h a v e a p p l i e d a f t e r Blum and
Hensley i s th a t the r u l e s se e k t o a p p ly
m a r k e t r a t e s f o r c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s
c o m p a r a b l e t o r a t e s i n o t h e r t y p e s o f
30
e q u a l l y c o m p l e x F e d e r a l l i t i g a t i o n . 13
R e c e n t l y , t h e E l e v e n t h C i r c u i t h a s
d i s a g r e e d by a d o p t in g a "narrow market"
r u l e . The c o u r t approved the payment o f
an h o u r ly r a t e t o a p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y
which was lower than the r a t e which that
a t t o r n e y " n o r m a l l y " c h a r g e d w h e n
d e f e n d in g management c l i e n t s in T i t l e VII
c a s e s . The c o u r t a p p r o v e d a " n a r r o w
market" r u l e f o c u s e d on the "market" f o r
p l a i n t i f f s ' a t t o r n e y s b e c a u s e a l th ou g h
" i t m i g h t b e r e a s o n a b l e t o c h a r g e a
management c l i e n t $120 an hour in a T i t l e
VII c a s e , the same lawyer would charge an
i n d i v i d u a l T i t l e V I I p l a i n t i f f $75 an
1,3 In so d o in g the c i r c u i t s are
f o l l o w i n g the c o n g r e s s i o n a l mandate that
" t h e a m o u n t o f f e e s a w a r d e d . . . b e
g o v e r n e d by t h e same s t a n d a r d s w h ic h
p r e v a i l i n o t h e r t y p e s o f e q u a l l y complex
F e d e r a l l i t i g a t i o n , s u c h a s a n t i t r u s t
c a s e s . . . . " S. Rep. No. 9 4 -1 0 1 1 , p. 6
( 1 9 7 6 ) , q u o t e d in H e n s le y , 461 U.S. at
430 n. 4.
31
h ou r b e c a u s e t h e i n d i v i d u a l w o u ld not
l i k e l y be a b l e t o bear the expense o f a
l o s s i f a s i g n i f i c a n t l y h ig h e r r a t e were
c h a r g e d . " Mayson v . P i e r c e , 806 F . 2d a t
1557 .
A lthough in p a r t a m a rket -b ased
r u l e , the Mayson s ta n d a rd l i k e the one in
C o u l t e r w i l l s e r v e t o d r i v e e x p e r i e n c e d
a t t o r n e y s away from the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f
c i v i l r i g h t s g r i e v a n t s . In e f f e c t , the
E l e v e n t h C i r c u i t has r u l e d th a t c o u r t s
s h o u l d i s s u e s m a l l e r f e e a w a rd s f o r
l a w y e r s w i t h p o o r c l i e n t s t h a n f o r
l a w y e r s w i t h w e a l t h y c l i e n t s . The f e e
s t a t u t e s w ere i n t e n d e d t o rem ove t h i s
ty p e o f f i n a n c i a l b a r r i e r t o the j u d i c i a l
p r o c e s s . In any e v e n t , t h e c o n f u s i o n
c a u s e d b y t h e c o n f l i c t s b e t w e e n t h e
" c o m p e t e n t a t t o r n e y " r u l e o f the S ix t h
C i r c u i t and the m a rket -b ased r u l e s o f the
32
o t h e r c i r c u i t s and among the f i v e market-
b a s e d r u l e s r e q u i r e s t h i s C o u r t ' s
a t t e n t i o n .
B. Compensable H ours .
U n l i k e t h e m u l t i f a c e t e d
c o n f l i c t among t h e c i r c u i t s o v e r t h e
p rop er c a l c u l a t i o n o f a r e a s o n a b le h o u r ly
r a t e , t h e c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n t h e S i x t h
C i r c u i t ' s d e c i s i o n i n C o u l t e r and the
o t h e r c i r c u i t s ov er the d e t e r m in a t i o n o f
c o m p e n s a b l e h o u r s i s o n e - d i m e n s i o n a l .
The S i x t h C i r c u i t a d o p t e d a f i x e d -
p e r c e n t a g e r u l e that " [ i ] n the a b sen ce o f
u n u s u a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s " a p l a i n t i f f ' s
a t t o r n e y ma y b e c o m p e n s a t e d f o r
l i t i g a t i n g the a t t o r n e y ' s f e e i s s u e f o r
h o u r s w h i c h do " n o t e x c e e d 3% o f t h e
hours in the main c a s e when the i s s u e i s
s u b m i t t e d on the papers [ o r ] 5% o f the
h o u r s in the main c a s e when a t r i a l i s
33
Every other
a p p e l l a t e c o u r t which has c o n s i d e r e d the
i s s u e h a s r e j e c t e d a n y d i f f e r e n t
t r e a t m e n t f o r t h e c o m p e n s a t i o n o f an
a t t o r n e y ' s t i me s p e n t l i t i g a t i n g t h e
e n t i t l e m e n t t o a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s .
The a d o p t i o n o f an a r b i t r a r y
r u l e l i k e the C o u l t e r r u l e f o r l i m i t i n g
com p ensat ion f o r f e e l i t i g a t i o n has been
r e j e c t e d by t h e o t h e r c i r c u i t s b eca u se
s u c h a r u l e p l a i n l y c o n f l i c t s w ith the
p u r p o s e o f p r o v i d i n g a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s t o
p r e v a i l i n g p a r t i e s . I f a t t o r n e y s a re not
c o m p e n s a t e d f o r t i m e s p e n t o n f e e
l i t i g a t i o n t h e y "may become wary about
necessary." App. 23a-24a.
ta k in g T i t l e VII c a s e s . II P ra n d in i v .
N a t i o n a l Tea C o . , 585 F . 2d 47, 54 ( 3d
C i r . 1978) . " I t sh o u ld be i n c o n s i s t e n t
w i t h t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e F e e s A c t t o
d i l u t e a f e e s a w a r d by r e f u s i n g t o
34
c o m p e n s a t e t h e a t t o r n e y f o r t h e t im e
r e a s o n a b l y s p e n t i n e s t a b l i s h i n g and
n e g o t i a t i n g h i s r i g h t f u l c l a i m t o the
f e e . " Lund v . A f f l e c k , 587 F . 2d 75, 77
( 1 s t C i r . 1 9 7 8 ) . The F i f t h , Seventh ,
E ighth and Ninth C i r c u i t s e x p l i c i t l y r e l y
upon the r u l e announced in Lund th a t time
d e v o t e d t o c o l l e c t i n g f e e s mus t be
c o m p e n s a t e d f o r i n th e same manner as
t ime sp ent on o t h e r i s s u e s . Johnson v .
S t a t e o f M i s s i s s i p p i , 606 F. 2d 635, 638
( 5 t h C i r . 1 9 7 9 ) ; L o v e l l v . C i t y o f
K a n k a k e e , 783 F . 2d 95 , 97 ( 7 t h C i r .
19 8 6 ) ; J o n e s v . M a c M i l l a n B l o e d e l
C o n t a i n e r s , I n c . , 685 F. 2d 236, 239 ( 8th
C i r . 1982) ; S ou th east Legal D efense Group
v . Adams, 657 F. 2d 1118, 1126 ( 9 t h C i r .
1981) .
U n t i l the d e c i s i o n in C o u l t e r ,
t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s h a v e u n i f o r m l y
35
d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s
" d i s c r e t i o n [ f o r a w a r d in g com p en sa t ion
f o r f e e l i t i g a t i o n ] must be e x e r c i s e d in
l i g h t o f t h e same c o n s i d e r a t i o n s th a t
a f f e c t t h e l o d e s t a r d e t e r m i n a t i o n . "
B lack G r iev a n ce Committee v . P h i l a d e l p h i a
E l e c t r i c C o ■, 802 F. 2d a t 657; s e e a l s o ,
In re Nucorp Energy, I n c . , 764 F .2d 655,
660 ( 9 t h C i r . 1985) . The C o u l t e r r u l e
l i m i t i n g the number o f com pensable hours
by an a r b i t r a r y p e r c e n t a g e f i g u r e i s in
d i r e c t c o n f l i c t w i th c a l c u l a t i o n o f f e e s
by the o t h e r c i r c u i t s .
I I . THE SIXTH CIRCUIT DECISION CONFLICTS
WITH THIS COURT' S STANDARDS FOR
DETERMINING "REASONABLE" ATTORNEY'S
FEES AND RAISES IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
FOR THE APPLICATION OF MORE THAN 100
STATUTES PROVIDING FOR ATTORNEY'S
FEES TO PREVAILING PARTIES.
By r e j e c t i n g t h i s C o u r t ' s l o d e s t a r
36
method14 f o r c a l c u l a t i n g a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s ,
t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t in C o u l t e r undermines
" [ t ] h e p u rp ose o f [ t h e f e e p r o v i s i o n ] t o
ensure ' e f f e c t i v e a c c e s s t o the j u d i c i a l
p r o c e s s ' f o r p e r s o n s w ith c i v i l r i g h t s
g r i e v a n c e s . " Hensley v. E c k e r h a r t , 461
U. S . a t 429 , q u o t in g H.R. Rep. No. 9 4 -
1 5 5 8 , p . 1 ( 1 9 7 6 ) . T h e p r o p e r
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f the l o d e s t a r approach
d e p e n d s upon t h e (1 ) a p p l i c a t i o n o f a
" m a r k e t r a t e " f o r s e r v i c e s , ( 2 )
c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r " r e a s o n a b l y expended"
h o u rs , (3) use o f o b j e c t i v e and r e a d i l y
a s c e r t a i n a b l e e v i d e n c e , and ( 4 ) t he
"The most u s e f u l s t a r t i n g p o i n t
f o r d e t e r m i n i n g t h e a m o u n t o f a
r e a s o n a b l e f e e i s t h e number o f hours
r e a s o n a b l y e x p e n d e d on t h e l i t i g a t i o n
m u l t i p l i e d by a r e a s o n a b le h o u r ly r a t e . "
H e n s le y , 461 U.S. at 433. "T h is f i g u r e ,
commonly r e f e r r e d t o as the ' l o d e s t a r , '
i s presumed to be the r e a s o n a b le f e e . . . . "
C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e v . R i v e r a , 91 L. Ed. 2d
a t 476.
37
i n c l u s i o n o f t h e r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s f o r
d e te r m in in g r e a s o n a b le f e e s . The Cg^ulter
d e c i s i o n c o n f l i c t s w i t h e a c h o f t h e s e
f o u r p r i n c i p l e s .
1. In o r d e r t o a s s u r e " e f f e c t i v e
a c c e s s " t o the j u d i c i a l p r o c e s s the Court
d e t e r m i n e d t h a t r e a s o n a b l e a t t o r n e y ’ s
f e e s " a r e t o be c a l c u l a t e d a c c o r d i n g to
t h e p r e v a i l i n g m a rk et r a t e . " Blum..v
S t e n s o n , 465 U.S. a t 8 9 5 . 15 By h o l d i n g
that an h o u r ly r a t e sh o u ld be s e t w ith ou t
r e g a r d t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r s k i l l a nd
3-® "As n e a r l y as p o s s i b l e , market
s ta n d a r d s sh o u ld p r e v a i l , f o r th a t i s the
b e s t way o f e n s u r i n g t h a t c o m p e t e n t
c o u n s e l w i l l be a v a i l a b l e t o a l l p e rs o n s
w ith bona f i d e c i v i l r i g h t s c l a i m s . This
means th a t ju d g es awarding f e e s must make
c e r t a i n t h a t a t t o r n e y s a re p a id by the
f u l l m a rk e t v a l u e t h a t t h e i r e f f o r t s
would r e c e i v e on the open market in non -
c i v i l - r i g h t s c a s e s . . . . " ( E m p h a s i s
a d d e d ) , H e n s l e y , 4 6 1 U . S . a t 4 4 7
( B r e n n a n , J . , j o i n e d b y M a r s h a l l ,
Blackmun, and S te v e n s , J J . , c o n c u r r i n g in
p a r t and d i s s e n t i n g in p a r t ) .
38
e x p e r i e n c e o f the lawyer r e q u e s t i n g f e e s
and t o l i m i t compensable hours by a f l a t
p e r c e n t a g e f i g u r e , t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t
f a i l s t o p r o v i d e com pensat ion a t a f u l l
market r a t e .
I f a s determ ined by the S ix t h
C i r c u i t , f e e a w ard s do n o t co m p e n sa te
e x p e r i e n c e d a t t o r n e y s a t the r a t e s which
t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e commands in the market
p l a c e , law yers in c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s w i l l
i n c r e a s i n g l y be i n e x p e r i e n c e d o r l e s s
com p eten t . Less e f f e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
w i l l i l l - s e r v e t h e v i c t i m s o f i l l e g a l
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and may o v e r b u r d e n t h e
c o u r t s w i t h i n e f f i c i e n t l y p r e s e n t e d
l i t i g a t i o n .
The g r e a t e r the e x p e r i e n c e and
s k i l l o f an a t t o r n e y t h e g r e a t e r t h e
p o t e n t i a l l o s s i n c o m p e n s a t i o n i n the
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f c i v i l r i g h t s
39
p l a i n t i f f s . The S ix t h C i r c u i t " com petent
a t t o r n e y " r u l e e i t h e r d i s c o u r a g e s t h e
e x p e r i e n c e d a t t o r n e y s f r o m championing
c i v i l r i g h t s p l a i n t i f f s o r d i r e c t s t h o s e
a t t o r n e y s t o t a k e c a s e s w i t h i n t h e
c i r c u i t s which r e c o g n i z e the market v a lu e
1f o r t h e i r s e r v i c e s .
M o r e o v e r , t h e C o u l t e r r u l e
d i s c o u r a g e s e f f i c i e n t l i t i g a t i o n . I f an
e x p e r i e n c e d a t t o r n e y s u c h a s B e l t o n
1 G The C o u l t e r r u l e i s a g r e a t e r
d i s i n c e n t i v e f o r law yers t o take a c i v i l
r i g h t s c a s e than the p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y r u l e
r e j e c t e d by the Court f o r that rea son in
C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e v . R i v e r a . At l e a s t
w i t h t h e p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y r u l e t h e r e i s
the p o t e n t i a l f o r a r e c o v e r y in e x c e s s o f
n orm a l b i l l i n g r a t e s . A p l a i n t i f f may
r e c o v e r a s i g n i f i c a n t sum which , i f the
a t t o r n e y r e c e i v e d a c o n t i n g e n c y f e e ,
might r e s u l t in an e f f e c t i v e h o u r ly r a t e
i n e x c e s s o f t h e a t t o r n e y ' s c u s to m a r y
b i l l i n g r a t e . But t h e C o u l t e r r u l e
p r o v i d e s no o p p o r t u n i t y f o r an enhanced
b i l l i n g r a t e — o n l y the p o s s i b i l i t y th a t
a c o u r t w o u l d o r d e r c o m p e n s a t i o n
a c c o r d i n g t o a r e d u c e d h o u r l y b i l l i n g
r a t e .
40
g u i d e s a n o v i c e s u c h a s Ms. A r t h u r
t h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a c a s e , he
r i s k s t h e c o u r t d e t e r m i n i n g , as t he
C o u l t e r c o u r t d i d , t h a t t h e j u n i o r
a t t o r n e y c o u l d have done the c a s e a l o n e .
Under the C o u l t e r r u l e i t i s not in the
econom ic i n t e r e s t o f a s e n i o r a t t o r n e y to
a g ree t o a s s i s t a j u n i o r a t t o r n e y or t o
a s s o c i a t e a j u n i o r a t t o r n e y on a c a s e .
The s e n i o r a t t o r n e y i s b e t t e r a d v is e d t o
p r o c e e d a l o n e in o r d e r that the c o u r t may
not p o i n t t o the work o f some more j u n i o r
lawyer as a b a s i s f o r re d u c in g the h o u r ly
r a t e . By d e p a r t in g from the m a r k e t - r a t e
a p p r o a c h t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t has c r e a t e d
anomalous econom ic i n c e n t i v e s which spur
an a t t o r n e y t o make r a t i o n a l e c o n o m ic
d e c i s i o n s f o r h i m s e l f which c o n t r a d i c t
the e f f i c i e n t o p e r a t i o n o f l i t i g a t i o n .
2. E q u a l l y as i m p o r t a n t t o t h e
41
a p p l i c a t i o n o f " th e f u l l market r a t e " f o r
e n s u r i n g t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f e f f e c t i v e
c o u n s e l i s t h e a s s u r a n c e t h a t a
p r e v a i l i n g p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y s
" [ n ] o r m a l l y [ w i l l r e c e i v e c om p en sa t ion
f o r ] a l l hours r e a s o n a b l y expended on the
l i t i g a t i o n . . . . " H e n s l e y , 461 U. S. a t
435, Rather than f o l l o w i n g t h i s "normal"
r u l e o f f u l l c o m p e n s a t i o n , t h e S i x t h
C i r c u i t c r e a t e d a presum p tion t h a t , as a
g e n e r a l m a t t e r , a t t o r n e y s w i l l n o t be
c o m p e n s a t e d f o r a l l t h e i r h o u r s which
t h e y spend l i t i g a t i n g an e n t i t l e m e n t to
f e e s .
42
In t h e a b s e n c e
o f u n u s u a l
c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e
h o u r s a l l o w e d f o r
p r e p a r i n g a n d
l i t i g a t i n g t h e
a t t o r n e y f e e c a s e
sh ou ld not ex ce e d Z%
o f t h e h o u r s in the
ma i n c a s e when t h e
i s s u e i s sub m itted on
the p ap ers w i th o u t a
t r i a l and sh ou ld not
e x c e e d 5% o f t h e
h o u r s i n t h e ma i n
c a s e when a t r i a l i s
n e c e s s a r y .
App. 23a-2 4 a . The S ix t h C i r c u i t p r o v id e d
n o a n a l y t i c a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r
e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e c u t o f f a t 3% o r 5%.
H o w e v e r , t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t w a s
f o r t h r i g h t in s t a t i n g that the m o t i v a t i o n
f o r t h i s r u l e was the " o b v io u s inadequacy
in the ' l o d e s t a r * method o f c a l c u l a t i o n s "
App . 10a - - an u n u s u a l l o w e r c o u r t
c r i t i c i s m o f a r e c e n t l y adopted Supreme
43
Court standard.
The S i x t h C i r c u i t ' s a r b i t r a r y
3% r u l e l i m i t i n g a p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y ' s
c o m p e n s a b le hours c r e a t e s a s u b s t a n t i a l
o b s t a c l e in t h e way o f law yers s e e k in g
f e e s a n d w i l l make i t " l e s s l i k e l y
l a w y e r s w i l l [ a g r e e ] t o u n d e r t a k e the
r i s k o f r e p r e s e n t i n g c i v i l r i g h t s
p l a i n t i f f s . . . . " H e n s l e y , 461 U.S. at 456 17
17
17 During the 13 hours which he
sp ent p r e p a r in g h i s f e e r e q u e s t P r o f e s s o r
B e l t o n o b t a in e d o r d e v e l o p e d the e v id e n c e
s u p p o r t i n g t h e r e q u e s t f o r f e e s , s i x
a f f i d a v i t s from o t h e r a t t o r n e y s and h i s
own a f f i d a v i t a n d l i s t o f h o u r s ,
memorandum in su p p o r t o f the r e q u e s t , and
a m o t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l n o t i c e . The
d e f e n d a n t s p r e p a r e d a t w e n t y - p a g e
"Response" t o the r e q u e s t . S ix t h C i r c u i t
A p p . 1 7 6 - 9 5 . U n l e s s an a r b i t r a r y
s t a n d a r d - - s u c h a s the 3% r u l e - - i s
u s e d , i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o j u s t i f y a
c o n c l u s i o n t h a t B e l t o n r e q u e s t e d
com p ensa t ion f o r an " e x c e s s i v e " number o f
h o u r s .
44
(Brennan, e t a l . , J J ) . 18 " [ I ] f a t t o r n e y s
are r e q u i r e d t o l i t i g a t e f o r t h e i r f e e s
b u t a r e n o t c o m p e n s a t e d f o r t h e t im e
spent on such l i t i g a t i o n , t h e i r e f f e c t i v e
r a t e s w i l l be r e d u c e d c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y .
A t t o r n e y s may become wary about ta k in g
T i t l e V II c a s e s , c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s , or
o t h e r c a s e s f o r which a t t o r n e y s f e e s are
s t a t u t o r i l y a u t h o r i z e d . " Pawlak v .
Greenawald , 713 F. 2d a t 973.
3. By e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e l o d e s t a r
a p p r o a c h t o t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s t h e C o u r t i n t e n d e d to
18 The Court ob serv ed in H e n s le y ,
461 U. S . a t 430 that the Senate Report
f o r t h e C i v i l R i g h t s A T t o r n e y ' s F ees
Awards Act o f 1976, S. Rep. No. 94 -1011 ,
p . 6 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , r e f e r s t o t h r e e d i s t r i c t
c o u r t c a s e s which c o r r e c t l y determ ined an
award o f r e a s o n a b l e f e e s . In one o f
t h e s e d e c i s i o n s , S t a n f o r d D a i l y v .
Z u rch er , 64 F. R. D. 680, 683-84 (N.D. Cal .
1974) , the c o u r t r u l e d that the r e f u s a l
t o award f e e s f o r s e r v i c e s r e l a t e d t o
c o l l e c t i o n w o u ld i m p r o p e r l y d i l u t e the
i n i t i a l award.
45
l i m i t the e x t e n t o f l i t i g a t i o n o v e r f e e
c la im s and t o en cou ra g e the s e t t l e m e n t o f
such c l a i m s . H e n s l e y , 461 U.S. a t 437;
Blum , 465 U . S . a t 902 n . 1 9 . The
H e n s l e y , l o d e s t a r a pproach " p r o v i d e s an
o b j e c t i v e b a s i s on w h i c h t o make an
i n i t i a l e s t i m a t e o f t h e v a l u e o f a
l a w y e r ' s s e r v i c e s . " 461 U.S. a t 433.
R e l ia n c e on an o b j e c t i v e and p r e d i c t a b l e
s t a n d a r d w h i c h d e p e n d s o n e a s i l y
a v a i l a b l e e v id e n c e s e r v e s the twin g o a l s
o f l i m i t i n g l i t i g a t i o n and p r o m o t i n g
1 Qs e t t l e m e n t . 19
19 On t h e o t h e r h a n d , the Court
r e j e c t e d t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h e t w e l v e -
f a c t o r a n a l y s i s f o r d e t e r m i n i n g f e e s
i n i t i a l l y s e t f o r t h in Johnson v . G eorg ia
Highway E xp ress , I n c . , 488 F . 2d 714 ( 5t h
C i r . 1974) , b e ca u se i t "gave v e r y l i t t l e
a c t u a l g u id a n ce " t o low er c o u r t s " and by
" [ s ] e t t i n g a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s by r e f e r e n c e
t o a s e r i e s o f s o m e t i m e s s u b j e c t i v e
f a c t o r s p l a c e d u n l i m i t e d d i s c r e t i o n in
t r i a l j u d g e s a n d p r o d u c e d d i s p a r a t e
r e s u l t s . " P e n n s y l v a n i a v . D e la w a r e
V a l l e y C i t i z e n s , 92 L .E d .2 d a t 455.
46
H o w e v e r , t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t
r e j e c t e d the o b j e c t i v i t y and d i s c i p l i n e
g a in e d by a r e l i a n c e on the market p l a c e .
The S ix t h C i r c u i t ' s " com petent" a t t o r n e y
r u l e depends not upon o b j e c t i v e e v id e n c e
b u t on a c o u r t ' s s u b j e c t i v e assessm ent
made a t the end o f a t r i a l th a t a l e s s
s e n i o r o r e x p e r i e n c e d a t t o r n e y c o u l d have
s u c c e s s f u l l y l i t i g a t e d the c a s e . I f the
c o u r t s o f i n d s , i t may t h e n pay one
a t t o r n e y , who s u c c e s s f u l l y p r o s e c u t e d the
a c t i o n , a t the market r a t e o f some o t h e r
a t t o r n e y w h o , a s i n C o u l t e r , i s
s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s e x p e r i e n c e d and
s k i l l e d . The S ix t h C i r c u i t ' s approach i s
an i n v i t a t i o n t o s u b j e c t i v e r e t r o s p e c t i v e
judgments which can o n l y l e a d t o w id e ly
d i s p a r a t e f e e awards.
The S ix t h C i r c u i t s ta n d ard f o r
a w a r d i n g r e a s o n a b l e a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s
47
r a i s e s t h e s u b j e c t i v i t y and low ers the
p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f the p r o c e s s and thus
c o m p l i c a t e s f e e l i t i g a t i o n and l e s s e n s
s e t t l e m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s . The l o w e r
c o u r t ' s s ta n d a rd c r e a t e s an " a r t i f i c i a l ,
j u d g e - m a d e d o c t r i n e " wh ich r e l i e s upon
s u b j e c t i v e assessm en ts and r e p l a c e s the
" s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d command" f o r r e a s o n a b le
f e e s w ith "a F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s monster . . .
l e a v i n g w a s t e a n d c o n f u s i o n ( n o t t o
mention c i r c u i t s p l i t s ) in i t s wake [and]
i n c r e a s e s t h e d e l a y , u n c e r t a i n t y , and
e x p e n s e o f b r i n g i n g a c i v i l r i g h t s
c a s e . . . . " H e n s l e y , 461 U.S. a t 455-56
(Brennan, e t a l . , J J . )
4. T h e S i x t h C i r c u i t o p i n i o n
c o n f l i c t s w ith the b a s i c prem ise o f the
C o u r t ' s s t a n d a r d t h a t t h e l o d e s t a r i s
presumed t o be the r e a s o n a b le f e e beca u se
th a t " f i g u r e i n c l u d e s most , i f no t a l l ,
48
o f t h e r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s c o m p r i s i n g a
' r e a s o n a b l e ' a t t o r n e y ' s f e e . . . . "
P en n sy lv an ia v . Delaware V a l l e y C i t i z e n s '
C o u n c i l f o r Clean A i r , 92 L. Ed. 2d at
4 5 7 . 20 But t h e C o u l t e r " c o m p e t e n t
a t t o r n e y " r u l e d o e s n o t i n c l u d e
c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r t h e " s k i l l " o r
" e x p e r i e n c e " o f the p l a i n t i f f ' s a t t o r n e y .
Nor does the C o u l t e r f l a t p e r c e n t a g e r u l e
l i m i t i n g c o m p e n s a b l e hours a c co u n t f o r
the " n o v e l t y " o r " c o m p l e x i t y " o f i s s u e s .
^ u F o r e x a m p l e , s i n c e " [ t ] he
s p e c i a l s k i l l and e x p e r i e n c e o f c o u n s e l
sh ou ld be r e f l e c t e d in the r e a s o n a b le n e s s
o f t h e h o u r l y r a t e " and " [ t ] h e n o v e l t y
and c o m p l e x i t y o f the i s s u e s presumably
[ a r e ] f u l l y r e f l e c t e d in the number o f
b i l l a b l e h o u r s , " i t i s not a p p r o p r i a t e as
a g e n e r a l m a t t e r t o c o n s i d e r t h e s e
f a c t o r s when " d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r t o
i n c r e a s e the b a s i c f e e aw ard ." Blum v .
S t e n s o n , 465 U. S . a t 898 ; s e e a l s o ,
P en n sy lv an ia v . Delaware V a l l e y C i t i z e n s '
C o u n c i l f o r C lean A i r , 92 L. Ed. 2d at
456 .
49
I f , f o r example, the " l o d e s t a r "
h o u r ly r a t e i s pegged a t the market r a t e
f o r t h e s e r v i c e s o f a h i g h l y s k i l l e d
a t t o r n e y t h e n " i t i s u n n e c e s s a r y t o
e n h a n c e t h e f e e f o r s u p e r i o r
p e r f o r m a n c e . . . . " P e n n s y l v a n i a v .
D e l a w a r e V a l l e y C i t i z e n s C o u n c i l , 9 2
L . E d . 2 d a t 4 5 7 . But t h e C o u l t e r r u l e
d o e s n o t s e t t h e h o u r l y r a t e a t t h e
market v a lu e f o r the s e r v i c e s o f a h i g h l y
s k i l l e d la w y er . Without an enhancement
o f the h o u r ly r a t e t h e r e i s no adequate
com p ensa t ion f o r the s e r v i c e s o f a h i g h l y
s k i l l e d a t t o r n e y u n d e r t h e C o u l t e r
r u l e . 21
z 1 O th e r l o w e r c o u r t s understand
t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f the p ro p e r l o d e s t a r
c a l c u l a t i o n w i t h a l i m i t a t i o n on t h e
c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f f a c t o r s f o r enhancement.
F o r e x a m p l e , t h e F i r s t C i r c u i t
i n t e r p r e t e d B 1 urn a s p r o v i d i n g " t h a t
' q u a l i t y o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ' i s g e n e r a l l y
r e f l e c t e d in the r e a s o n a b le h o u r ly r a t e "
b u t t h a t " s k i l l and e x p e r i e n c e as a
50
I I I . THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FAILED TO PROVIDE
THE N E C E S S A R Y CAREFUL REVIEW OF
ATTORNEY'S FEES DECISIONS REQUIRED BY
HENSLEY AND BLUM.
W h i l e i n d i c a t i n g th a t " [ a ] r e q u e s t
f o r a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s sh ou ld not r e s u l t in
a secon d major l i t i g a t i o n , " the Court has
s t r e s s e d th a t i t "remains im portant . . .
f o r t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o p r o v i d e a
c o n c i s e b u t c l e a r e x p l a n a t i o n o f i t s
re a so n s f o r the f e e award" in o r d e r that
the a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s may ensure th a t the
awards a re c o n s i s t e n t w ith the im portant
p u rp oses o f the f e e s t a t u t e s . Hensley v ,
E c k e r h a r t , 461 U.S. a t 437.- A c c o r d i n g l y ,
even though the lower c o u r t " f i n d i n g s [ i n
Hens 1 e y 1 r e p r e s e n t [ ed ] a com m endable
l i t i g a t o r a r e [ t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s lawyer]
s t o c k - i n - t r a d e and [ t h e lawyer sh o u ld be]
p a id h i s . . . p r i c e . " Wildman v . Lerner
S t o r e s C o r p . , 771 F . 2 d a t 6 1 0 - 1 1 ; s ee
a l s o , Daly v . H i l l , 790 F. 2d 1071, 1078
( 4t h C i r . 1986) ; B r a n t le y v . S u r l e s , 804
F .2d a t 325.
51
e f f o r t t o e x p l a i n t h e f e e a w a r d , " the
S u p re m e C o u r t r e m a n d e d t h e i s s u e o f
r e a s o n a b le f e e s f o r f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n
and p o s s i b l e f i n d i n g s . 461 U.S. a t 438.
I n B l u m t h e C o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e
c o n c l u s o r y s ta te m e n ts o f the low er c o u r t s
were in a d eq u a te t o su p p o r t the award o f
f e e s . 465 U.S. a t 898.
I n a p p r o v i n g t h e r e f u s a l t o
c o m p e n s a t e B e l t o n f o r more than 2 0 % o f
h i s t i m e , t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t f a i l e d to
e x e r c i s e p r o p e r a p p e l l a t e r e v ie w o f the
c o n c l u s o r y f i n d i n g s o f the lower c o u r t ,
For example, the low er c o u r t r u l e d th a t
t h e n u m b e r o f h o u r s f o r w h i c h
c o m p e n s a t i o n w a s s o u g h t w a s
" u n r e a s o n a b l e , " th a t an " i n o r d i n a t e " time
was sp ent on "a s im p le l a w s u i t , " and th a t
50% o f t h e h o u r s r e q u e s t e d f o r t r i a l
p r e p a r a t i o n was " s u f f i c i e n t t i m e . " The
52
S i x t h C i r c u i t a f f i r m e d the lower c o u r t
b e c a u s e i t d i d n o t " e x e r c i s e [ i t s ]
d i s c r e t i o n and e x p e r t i s e on t h i s mixed
q u e s t i o n o f law and f a c t in an a r b i t r a r y
o r u n f a i r w ay ." App. 27a.
T h e l o w e r c o u r t ' s e x e r c i s e o f
d i s c r e t i o n d o e s n o t pass muster s im p ly
b eca u se the c o u r t d id no t a c t a r b i t r a r i l y
o r u n f a i r l y . The a p p e l l a t e c o u r t must
in s u r e th a t the d i s t r i c t c o u r t e x e r c i s e d
i t s d i s c r e t i o n " ' i n l i g h t o f the l a r g e
o b j e c t i v e s ' " o f the f e e s t a t u t e s beca u se
"when C o n g re ss in v ok es the C h a n c e l l o r ' s
c o n s c i e n c e t o f u r t h e r t r a n s c e n d e n t
l e g i s l a t i v e p u rp o s e s , what i s r e q u i r e d i s
t h e p r i n c i p l e d a p p l i c a t i o n o f s ta n d a rd s
c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e s e p u rp oses and not
' e q u i t y [ w h i c h ] v a r i e s l i k e t h e
C h a n c e l l o r ' s f o o t . ' " A lbemarle Paper Co.
v . Moody, 422 U.S. a t 417 ( c i t a t i o n s and
53
f o o t n o t e o m i t t e d ) . A c o u r t ' s r e l i a n c e on
c o n c l u s o r y s t a t e m e n t s t o d e n y
com p ensat ion f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n o f
t h e t i m e e x p e n d e d b y a p l a i n t i f f ' s
a t t o r n e y thw arts the purp ose o f the f e e -
s h i f t i n g s t a t u t e s " t o e n su re e f f e c t i v e
a c c e s s t o t h e j u d i c i a l p r o c e s s , ' "
H e n s l e y , 461 U. S . a t 4 2 9 . A p p e l l a t e
c o u r t s must r ev iew d i s t r i c t c o u r t awards
more c l o s e l y than d id the S ix t h C i r c u i t
i n C o u l t e r , i n o r d e r t o a s s u r e t h a t
" [ w j h e r e a p l a i n t i f f h a s o b t a i n e d
e x c e l l e n t r e s u l t s , h i s a t t o r n e y sh ou ld
r e c o v e r a f u l l y com pensatory f e e . " I d .
a t 435.
54
If the Coulter decision stands a
l o w e r c o u r t may s i m p l y r e n d e r an
i n c a n t a t i o n t h a t the time f o r which an
a t t o r n e y r e q u e s t s c o m p e n s a t i o n was
" u n r e a s o n a b l e " o r " i n o r d i n a t e " in o r d e r
t o r ed u ce s i g n i f i c a n t l y the award. This
C o u r t d i d n o t p e r m i t a l o w e r c o u r t t o
i n c r e a s e a f e e - a w a r d b y a s s e r t i n g
c o n c l u s o r y r e a s o n s , s u c h as t h e " f a r
r e a c h i n g s i g n i f i c a n c e [ o f the r e l i e f ] to
a l a r g e c l a s s o f p e o p le " o r the " n o v e l t y "
or " c o m p l e x i t y " o f the l i t i g a t i o n . Blum
v. S t e n s o n , 465 U.S. a t 898. S i m i l a r l y ,
low er c o u r t s sh o u ld not be p e r m it t e d as
the C o u l t e r c o u r t d id t o reduce awards by
2 2e q u a l l y c o n c l u s o r y s t a te m e n ts .
22 The f a i l u r e o f t h e a p p e l l a t e
c o u r t t o r e q u i r e a more c a r e f u l a n a l y s i s
and f i n d i n g s from the d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s
e m p h a s i z e d by t h e f a c t t h a t , as t h i s
C o u r t f o u n d w i t h r e s p e c t t o a n o t h e r
d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s f i n d i n g s i n a n o t h e r
T i t l e VII c a s e , Bazemore v . F r i d a y , 92 L.
55
Ed. 2d 3 1 5 , 333 n . 1 5 ( 1 9 8 6 ) , " c e r t a i n
c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t are
i n e x p l i c a b l e in l i g h t o f the r e c o r d . "
F i r s t , on t h r e e o c c a s i o n s the
l o w e r c o u r t s t a t e d th a t C o u l t e r "was a
s i m p l e c a s e , " A p p . 4 3 a , 4 5 a - 4 6 a , b u t
f a i l e d t o e x p l a i n t h i s c o n c l u s i o n i n
l i g h t o f s e v e r a l u n d isp u te d f a c t s : (a)
the EEOC found th a t an " [ e ] x a m in a t i o n o f
t h e e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e s t h e r e i s n o t
r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t o b e l i e v e " t h a t
C o u l t e r ' s c h a r g e o f d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was
t r u e , S i x t h C i r c u i t A p p . 1 1 7 ; ( b )
T e n n e s s e e m a i n t a i n e d t h a t i t had n o t
d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t C o u l t e r t h r o u g h
t r i a l ; and ( c ) C o u l t e r had t o p rov e that
s h e was d e n i e d a p r o m o t i o n b e c a u s e o f
i n t e n t i o n a l g end er d i s c r i m i n a t i o n based
s o l e l y upon c i r c u m s t a n t i a l e v id e n c e s i n c e
t h e r e was no "smoking gun" e v i d e n c e .
Second , the d i s t r i c t determ ined
th a t "Mr. B e l t o n d oes not have any more
a b i l i t y as f a r as t r i a l o f t h i s ty pe o f
c a s e i s c o n c e r n e d t h a n Mrs. A r t h u r "
d e s p i t e t h e i n d i s p u t a b l y f a r g r e a t e r
e x p e r i e n c e o f B e l t o n than A rthur . T h ir d ,
t h e l o w e r c o u r t s t a t e d th a t " [ t ] h i s i s
n o t a p a p e r l a w s u i t , " App. 4 5 a , e v e n
th o u g h t h e p l a i n t i f f d id no t p r e s e n t a
s i n g l e t r i a l w i t n e s s but r a t h e r r e l i e d
upon d o c u m e n t s , s t i p u l a t i o n s , e x h i b i t s
and a p r e - t r i a l b r i e f , which Mr. B e l t o n
p r e p a r e d .
F o u r t h , t h e l o w e r c o u r t
56
The decisions of other circuits
stand in s t r o n g c o n t r a s t t o the f a i l u r e
o f t h e S i x t h C i r c u i t i n C o u l t e r t o
e v a l u a t e w h e t h e r t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t
p r o p e r l y e x e r c i s e d i t s d i s c r e t i o n
c o n s i s t e n t w i th the p u rp oses o f the f e e
s t a t u t e s . The Third C i r c u i t r e v e r s e d a
d i s t r i c t c o u r t d e c i s i o n s i m i l a r t o the
d e c i s i o n in C o u l t e r because " th e f i n d i n g s
o f t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t p u r p o r t i n g t o
j u s t i f y a r e d u c t i o n in the f e e r e q u e s t
a re no t s p e c i f i c and l a c k the e v i d e n t i a r y
b a s i s t o c o u n t e r t h e u n c o n t r a d i c t e d
a f f i d a v i t o f p l a i n t i f f ' s c o u n s e l
d e t a i l i n g t h e h o u r s e x p e n d e d and t h e
a s s e r t e d that some o f Mr. B e l t o n ' s hours
"must be d u p l i c a t e s , " App. 45a, o f Ms.
A r t h u r ' s h ou rs , d e s p i t e the f a c t that no
l i s t o f Ms, A r t h u r ' s hours o r i t e m i z a t i o n
o f her s e r v i c e s was even p r e s e n t e d t o the
d i s t r i c t c o u r t . F i f t h , the lower c o u r t
f a i l e d t o e v a l u a t e t h e s u b s t a n t i a l
e v id e n c e su b m itted by Mr. B e l t o n on the
market r a t e f o r a t t o r n e y s .
57
b i l l i n g r a t e . " Cunningham v . C i t y o f
M c K e e s p o r t , 807 F„ 2 d 49 , 52 ( 3d C i r .
1 9 8 6 ) . The S e v e n t h C i r c u i t c o n c l u d e d
t h a t i t " c a n n o t s u s t a i n a s u b s t a n t i a l
award o f a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s on the b a s i s o f
s o sk im p y an o p i n i o n as [ t h e ] d i s t r i c t
c o u r t w r o t e . " L e n a rd v . A r q e n t o , 808
F . 2 d a t 1 2 4 7 ; s e e a l s o , N i s b y v .
C o m m i s s i o n e r s C o u r t o f Johnson C ou n ty ,
798 F .2d a t 137.
CONCLUSION
I n o r d e r t o r e s o l v e c o n f l i c t s
between the c i r c u i t s on im portant i s s u e s
r e g a r d i n g t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f f e e -
s h i f t i n g s t a t u t e s , t o c o r r e c t a s e r i o u s
m i s a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s C o u r t ' s
s t a n d a r d s f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g r e a s o n a b l e
f e e s , and t o p r o v i d e g u id a n ce about the
p r o p e r m ea su re o f a " r e a s o n a b l e h o u r ly
r a t e , " t h e C o u r t s h o u l d g r a n t t h e
58
p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t o f c e r t i o r a r i t o
r e v ie w the judgment o f the S ix t h C i r c u i t .
R e s p e c t f u l l y su b m it ted ,
BARRY GOLDSTEIN*
806 15th S t r e e t , N.W.
S u i t e 940
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 638-3278
ROBERT BELTON
c\o Harvard Law S ch oo l
Cambridge, MA 02138
(617) 495-3124
JULIUS LeVonne CHAMBERS
CHARLES STEPHEN RALSTON
ERIC SCHNAPPER
99 Hudson S t r e e t
S ix t e e n t h F lo o r
New York, New York 10013
A tt o r n e y s f o r P e t i t i o n e r
C o u l t e r .
* (Counsel o f Record)
59
A P P E N D I X
INDEX
Page
O rder , d e n i a l o f p e t i t i o n f o r
r e h e a r i n g en banc (Decem
b e r 18, 1986) ..................................... la
Judgment o f the Court o f A pp ea ls
(O c t o b e r 29, 1986) ............ ................ 3a
O p in io n o f the Court o f A ppea ls
( O c t o b e r 29, 1 986 ) , 805 F. 2d
146 ................................................................ . 5a
O p in io n o f the D i s t r i c t Court
on the award o f a t t o r n e y ' s
f e e s (November 5, 1984) ................. 41a
Order o f the D i s t r i c t Court
(November 5, 1984) 49a
Agreed Memorandum o f the D i s t r i c t
Court (August 3, 1984) .................... 50a
Order o f the D i s t r i c t Court
( Augus t 3, 1984) 57a
No. 85-5109
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
MARY LUCILLE COULTER,
P l a i n t i f f - A p p e l l a n t , )
v .
STATE OF TENNESSEE, e t a l . ,
D e f e n d a n t s - A p p e l l e e s .
)
)
)
) O R D E R
)
)
)
)
)
)
BEFORE: LIVELY, C h ie f Judge, MERRITT and
WELLFORD, C i r c u i t
Judges
The Court hav ing r e c e i v e d a p e t i t i o n
f o r r e h e a r i n g en banc , and the p e t i t i o n
h a v i n g b e e n c i r c u l a t e d not o n l y t o the
o r i g i n a l p a n e l members but a l s o t o a l l
o t h e r a c t i v e jud ges o f t h i s C ourt , and no
j u d g e o f t h i s Court having re q u e s t e d a
v o t e on the s u g g e s t i o n f o r r e h e a r in g en
banc , the p e t i t i o n f o r r e h e a r in g has been
la
r e f e r r e d t o the o r i g i n a l h e a r in g p a n e l .
The p a n e l has f u r t h e r rev iew ed the
p e t i t i o n f o r r e h e a r i n g and c o n c lu d e s th a t
t h e i s s u e s r a i s e d in the p e t i t i o n were
f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d u p o n t h e o r i g i n a l
s u b m i s s i o n and d e c i s i o n o f t h e c a s e .
A c c o r d i n g l y , the p e t i t i o n i s d e n ie d .
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
______________ L 3 l_________
John P. Hehman, C lerk
2a
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
No. 85-5109
MARY LUCILLE COULTER,
P l a i n t i f f - A p p e l l a n t ,
v .
STATE OF TENNESSEE, e t a l . ,
D e f e n d a n t s - A p p e l l e e s .
B e f o r e : LIVELY, C h ie f Judge; MERRITT and
WELLFORD, C i r c u i t Judges .
J U D G M E N T
ON APPEAL f r o m t h e U n i t e d
S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e M id d le
D i s t r i c t o f Tennessee .
THIS CAUSE came on t o be heard
on t h e r e c o r d f r om t h e s a i d D i s t r i c t
Court and was argued by c o u n s e l .
3a
ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, I t i s
now h e r e o r d e r e d and a d j u d g e d by t h i s
c o u r t t h a t t h e ju d g m e n t , o f t h e s a i d
D i s t r i c t Court in t h i s c a s e be and the
same i s h ereb y a f f i r m e d in p a r t , r e v e r s e d
i n p a r t and t h e c a s e i s rem anded f o r
f u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h i s
o p i n i o n .
Each p a r t y i s t o bear i t s own
c o s t s on a p p e a l .
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
John P. Hehman, C le rk
__________________ Zjs/
C lerk
4a
MARY LUCILLE COULTER
P l a i n t i f f - A p p e l l a n t ,
v .
STATE OF TENNESSEE; Department
o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f the S t a t e
o f T enn essee , Department o f
P erson n e l o f the S t a t e o f
T enn essee ; and D a r r e l l D. Akins ,
Commissioner o f the Depart
ment o f P e r s o n n e l ,
D e f e n d a n t s - A p p e l l e e s .
No. 85 -5109 .
United S t a t e s Court o f A p p ea ls ,
S ix t h C i r c u i t
Argued J a n . 17, 1986 .
D ec ided O c t . 29 , 1986 .
B e f o r e LIVELY, C h ie f Judge, and MERRITT
and WELLFORD, C i r c u i t Judges .
MERRITT, C i r c u i t Judge.
T h i s i s an a t t o r n e y f e e a p p e a l
a r i s i n g from a T i t l e VII c a s e . Robert
B e l t o n , a V a n d e r b i l t U n i v e r s i t y law
5a
p r o f e s s o r who t e a c h e s in the employment
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n f i e l d , was a s s o c i a t e d by
a n o t h e r l a w y e r a s c o - c o u n s e l f o r a
p l a i n t i f f who u l t i m a t e l y won her c a s e .
M r . B e l t o n c h a l l e n g e s t h e D i s t r i c t
C o u r t ' s o r d e r r e d u c i n g h i s s e p a r a t e
a t t o r n e y f e e award a g a i n s t t h e l o s i n g
d e fe n d a n t s from $22 ,532 t o $ 1 4 ,1 6 7 . The
a p p e a l r a i s e s s i g n i f i c a n t i s s u e s
r e s p e c t i n g the a p p l i c a b l e h o u r ly r a t e t o
be used under the " l o d e s t a r " app roach to
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s 1 and the a pproach t o be
1 The r a t e - t i m e s - h o u r s method o f
c a l c u l a t i o n , o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o as the
" l o d e s t a r " method, has been a p p rov ed , in
m o d i f i e d f o r m, though not mandated, by
the Supreme C ou rt . See P e n n sy lv a n ia v .
D e la w a r e V a l i e v C i t i z e n s ' C o u n c i l f o r
Clean A i r , _____U.S. _____ , 106 S . Ct . 3088,
92 L . Ed . 2d 4 3 9 ( 1 9 8 6 ) ; H e n s l e y v .
E c k e r h a r t , 461 U.S. 424, 433, 103 S . Ct .
1 9 3 3 , 1 9 3 9 , 76 L . E d . 2 d 40 ( 1 9 8 3 ) ;
N o r t h c r o s s v . B oard o f E d u c a t i o n , 611
F . 2d 624, 636 ( 6 t h C i r . 1979) . See a l s o
R eport o f Th ird C i r c u i t Task F o r c e , Court
Awarded A t t o r n e y F e e s , 108 F . R . D . 237
( 1 9 8 5 ) , f o r c r i t i c i s m o f t h i s method and
6a
f o l l o w e d in measuring e x c e s s i v e h ou rs .
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
A l e t a A r t h u r and R o b e r t B e l t o n
r e p r e s e n t e d p l a i n t i f f C o u l t e r in a T i t l e
VI I s e x d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s u i t a g a i n s t the
S t a t e o f Tennessee and c e r t a i n Tennessee
a g e n c i e s and o f f i c i a l s . D i s t r i c t Judge
Morton r u l e d in f a v o r o f p l a i n t i f f on the
i s s u e o f l i a b i l i t y . The p a r t i e s by
agreement then sub m itted a c o n s e n t o r d e r
w h i c h d i s p o s e d o f a l l t h e r e m e d i a l
i s s u e s , awarded p l a i n t i f f a p rom ot ion and
a s m a l l amount o f com p ensat ion , awarded
Ms. Arthur $ 1 3 ,6 2 1 .2 5 in a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s
a t the r a t e o f $85 an hour , and r e s e r v e d
the q u e s t i o n o f a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s due Mr.
B e l t o n f o r l a t e r d e t e r m in a t i o n .
Mr. B e l t o n s u b s e q u e n t l y p e t i t i o n e d
t h e D i s t r i c t Court f o r an a t t o r n e y f e e
recommendations f o r improvement.
7a
award o f $ 2 2 ,5 3 2 .9 0 c a l c u l a t e d on a t o t a l
o f 185.59 hours worked a t r a t e s o f $110
p e r h ou r f o r s e r v i c e s r e n d e r e d d u r in g
198 2 ( 4 . 2 5 h ou rs ) and a t $125 p er hour
f o r 1983 ( 6 0 . 9 2 hou rs ) and 1984 ( 120 . 42
h o u r s ) . Judge Morton red u ced the h o u r ly
r a t e t o $85 f o r 1982 and $110 f o r 1983
and 1 9 84 , and he r e f u s e d t o award Mr.
B e l t o n a f e e f o r 55 .83 h ou rs , which he
c o n s i d e r e d u n r e a s o n a b ly expended . Taking
t h e s e r e d u c t i o n s i n t o a c c o u n t , J u d ge
Morton o r d e r e d the d e fe n d a n t s t o pay Mr.
B e l t o n a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s in the amount o f
$ 1 4 , 1 6 7 .3 5 . Judge Morton found th a t Ms.
Arthur was the " l e a d " law yer , a s ea son ed
and e f f e c t i v e t r i a l law yer , who con d u c ted
a l l o f the t r i a l and a l l the d e p o s i t i o n
e x a m i n a t i o n s . Mr. B e l t o n a s s i s t e d in
l e g a l r e s e a r c h and c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f
the c a s e and in the re v ie w o f documents
8a
and p r e p a r a t i o n o f c o u r t p a p e r s . Judge
M o r t o n c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e c a s e a s
" s i m p l e , " " t r i e d i n l e s s th a n h a l f a
d a y , " and " d e c i d e d from the b e n c h . "
HOURLY RATES
In a d o p t i n g some 131 a t t o r n e y f e e
s h i f t i n g s t a t u t e s , 2 i n c l u d i n g the c i v i l
r i g h t s s t a t u t e a p p l i c a b l e h e re , 42 U. S. C.
§ 2 0 0 0 e - 5 ( k ) ( 1 9 8 2 ) ( a w a r d i n g
" r e a s o n a b l e " f e e s t o p r e v a i l i n g p a r t i e s
i n t h e " d i s c r e t i o n " o f t h e c o u r t ) ,
C ongress in te n d e d to p r o v i d e an econom ic
i n c e n t i v e f o r the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n t o t r y
m e r i t o r i o u s c a s e s d e f i n i n g and e n f o r c i n g
s t a t u t o r y p o l i c i e s and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
r i g h t s i n a v a r i e t y o f f i e l d s o f l e g a l
p r a c t i c e . Congress d id not in t e n d th a t
l a w y e r s , a l r e a d y a r e l a t i v e l y w e l l o f f
z 9 A t t ' y Fee Awards R e p o r t e r 2-3
(1986) (See Appendix A ) .
9a
p r o f e s s i o n a l c l a s s , r e c e i v e e x c e s s
c o m p e n s a t i o n o r i n c e n t i v e s b e y o n d t h e
amount n e c e s s a r y t o cause com petent l e g a l
work t o be p e r f o r m e d i n t h e s e f i e l d s .
L e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y speaks o f " f e e s which
a r e a d e q u a t e t o a t t r a c t c o m p e t e n t
c o u n s e l , b u t w h i c h d o n o t p r o d u c e
w i n d f a l l s , " S . R e p . No. 9 4 - 1 0 1 1 , p . 6
( 1 9 7 6 ) , U. S . Code C ong . & Admin. News
1 9 7 6 , p p . 5 9 0 8 , 5 9 1 3 , a n d c a u t i o n s
a g a i n s t a l l o w i n g the s t a t u t e t o be used
as a " r e l i e f fund f o r l a w y e r s , " 122 Cong.
R e c . 3 3 3 1 4 ( 1 9 7 6 ) ( r e m a r k s o f S e n .
K e n n e d y ) . 3 The s t a t u t e s use the words
3 T h e s e q u o t a t i o n s a re from the
l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y o f 42 U. S. C. § 1988,
t h e C i v i l R ig h ts A t t o r n e y ' s Fees Awards
Act o f 1976. However, t h i s p r o v i s i o n was
p a t t e r n e d in p a r t on T i t l e V I I ' s a t t o r n e y
f e e p r o v i s i o n , which i s i n v o l v e d in t h i s
c a s e . See H ensley v . E c k e r h a r t , 461 U.S.
424, 433 n. 7, 103 S . Ct . 1933, 1939 n. 7,
76 L . E d . 2 d 40 ( 1 9 8 3 ) ; H a n r a h a n v .
Ham pton , 446 U. S . 7 5 4 , 758 n. 4, 100
S . C t . 1987, 1989 n. 4, 64 L . E d . 2d 670
10a
r e a s o n a b l e " f e e s , n o t " l i b e r a l " f e e s .
Such f e e s a r e d i f f e r e n t from the p r i c e s
charged t o w e l l - t o - d o c l i e n t s by the most
n o t e d l a w y e r s and ren ow n ed f i r m s in a
r e g i o n . Under t h e se s t a t u t e s a renowned
la w y e r who c u s t o m a r i l y r e c e i v e s $250 an
h o u r i n a f i e l d in which competent and
e x p e r i e n c e d l a w y e r s i n t h e r e g i o n
n o r m a l l y r e c e i v e $85 an hour sh o u ld be
c o m p e n s a t e d a t t h e l o w e r r a t e . 4 We
( 1 9 8 0 ) . We c o n s i d e r t h e l e g i s l a t i v e
h i s t o r y o f § 1988 t o be i n d i c a t i v e o f
c o n g r e s s i o n a l i n t e n t r e l a t i v e t o § 2000e-
5 ( k ) . For f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n o f t h i s
l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y , s e e H e n s l e y v .
E c k e r h a r t , 461 U. S . a t 4 2 9 -3 0 , 44 4 -4 6 ,
103 S . Ct . a t 1945-46 .
4 " T h e s e s t a t u t e s w e r e n o t
d e s ig n e d as a form o f econom ic r e l i e f to
im p rove the f i n a n c i a l l o t o f a t t o r n e y s ,
n o r w e r e t h e y i n t e n d e d t o r e p l i c a t e
e x a c t l y t h e f e e an a t t o r n e y c o u l d earn
t h r o u g h a p r i v a t e f e e arrangement w ith
h i s c l i e n t . I n s t e a d , t h e aim o f such
s t a t u t e s was t o e n a b le p r i v a t e p a r t i e s t o
o b t a i n l e g a l h e lp in s e e k in g r e d r e s s f o r
i n j u r i e s r e s u l t i n g f r om t h e a c t u a l or
t h r e a t e n e d v i o l a t i o n o f s p e c i f i c f e d e r a l
11a
t h e r e f o r e a p p ly the p r i n c i p l e th a t h o u r ly
r a t e f o r f e e awards sh o u ld not e x c e e d the
m a r k e t r a t e s n e c e s s a r y t o e n c o u r a g e
competent la w yers t o un derta ke the
l a w s . H e n ce , i f p l a i n t i f f s , s u c h as
D e l a w a r e V a l l e y , f i n d i t p o s s i b l e t o
e n g a g e a l a w y e r based on the s t a t u t o r y
a s s u r a n c e t h a t h e w i l l b e p a i d a
" r e a s o n a b l e f e e , " the p u rp ose beh ind the
f e e - s h a r i n g s t a t u t e has been s a t i s f i e d .
M o r e o v e r , when an a t t o r n e y
f i r s t a c c e p t s a c a s e a nd a g r e e s t o
r e p r e s e n t t h e c l i e n t , he o b l i g a t e s
h i m s e l f t o p e r f o r m t o t h e b e s t o f h i s
a b i l i t y and t o p rodu ce the b e s t p o s s i b l e
r e s u l t s commensurate w ith h i s s k i l l and
h i s c l i e n t ' s i n t e r e s t s . C a l c u l a t i n g the
f e e award in a manner th a t a c c o u n t s f o r
t h e s e f a c t o r s , e i t h e r in d e te r m in in g the
r e a s o n a b l e number o f hours expended on
t h e l i t i g a t i o n o r i n s e t t i n g t h e
r e a s o n a b l e h o u r ly r a t e , thus a d e q u a t e ly
com pensates the a t t o r n e y , and l e a v e s v e r y
l i t t l e room f o r enhancing the award based
on h i s p os t -en g ag em en t p e r fo rm a n ce . In
s h o r t , the l o d e s t a r f i g u r e i n c l u d e s most,
i f n o t a l l , o f t h e r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s
c o m p r is in g a " r e a s o n a b l e " a t t o r n e y ' s f e e ,
and i t i s u n n e c e s s a r y t o enhance the f e e
f o r s u p e r i o r p e r f o r m a n c e i n o r d e r t o
s e r v e the s t a t u t o r y purp ose o f e n a b l in g
p l a i n t i f f s t o s e c u r e l e g a l a s s i s t a n c e . "
P en n sy lv a n ia v . Delaware V a l i e v C i t i z e n ' s
C o u n c i l , su p ra , n. 1, 106 S . Ct . a t 3 0 98 -9 9 .
12a
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n in q u e s t i o n .
Mr. B e l t o n r e q u e s t e d th a t h i s f e e be
c a l c u l a t e d on an h o u r ly r a t e o f $100 per
h o u r f o r s e r v i c e s ren d ered in 1982 and
$125 per hour in 1983 and 1984. Judge
M o r to n r e d u c e d the h o u r ly r a t e s t o $85
f o r 1982 and $110 f o r 1983 and 1984 as
r e a s o n a b l y r e f l e c t i n g t h e p r e v a i l i n g
market r a t e s f o r law yers in t h i s f i e l d in
N a s h v i l l e , T e n n e s s e e , the community in
w h i c h b o t h Mr. B e l t o n and Ms. A r t h u r
p r a c t i c e .
T h i s f i n d i n g i s s u p p o r t e d by t h e
f a c t t h a t Mr. B e l t o n r e q u e s t e d and was
a w a rd ed f e e s b a s e d on an $85 r a t e f o r
s e r v i c e s r e n d e r e d i n 1982 i n a n o t h e r
T i t l e VI I a c t i o n b e f o r e Jud ge M orton .
P erk in s v . S t a t e Board o f E d u c a t i o n , No.
7 7 - 3 5 5 2 ( M. D. T e n n . March 11 , 1983)
[ a v a i l a b l e on WESTLAW, DCTU d a t a b a s e ] .
13a
Mr. B e l t o n a r g u e s that h i s h o u r ly r a t e
was low i n P e r k i n s b eca u se P e r k in s was
d e c i d e d b e f o r e t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t ' s
d e c i s i o n i n Blum v . S t e n s o n , 465 U.S.
8 8 6 , 104 S . C t . 1 5 4 1 , 79 L . E d . 2 d 891
( 1 9 8 4 ) , and d i d no t use the "market r a t e "
t h e o r y t h e Court e sp ou sed in Blum. In
Blum the Court r e j e c t e d the argument th a t
a t t o r n e y f e e awards f o r n o n p r o f i t c o u n s e l
s h o u l d be c a l c u l a t e d i n a c o s t - b a s e d
m eth od and s h o u l d be l o w e r th a n f e e s
c a l c u l a t e d under a market r a t e t h e o r y f o r
p r i v a t e " f o r p r o f i t " c o u n s e l .
Mr. B e l t o n ' s argument i m p l i e s th a t h i s
f e e s in P erk in s were lower b eca u se they
r e f l e c t e d h i s l o w e r c o s t o f p r a c t i c i n g
law r e s u l t i n g f r o m h i s f r e e a c c e s s t o
o f f i c e sp a ce and law l i b r a r y r e s o u r c e s at
V a n d e r b i l t Law S c h o o l .
Th is argument i s no t v a l i d . In an
14a
e a r l i e r o p i n i o n in P e r k i n s , Judge Morton
d id n o t e the argument th a t Mr. B e l t o n ' s
f e e sh o u ld be lower beca u se he was a law
p r o f e s s o r , b u t t h e j u d g e aw ard ed f e e s
"based on p r e v a i l i n g r a t e s in the a r e a . "
" I t i s t r u e , " he s a i d , " t h a t one o f the
u n d e r l y i n g f a c t o r s in s e t t i n g the r a t e
may be o v e r h e a d , b u t t o t h e r e c i p i e n t
t h e r e o f t h e c o m p o n e n t s h a v e n o
p e r t i n e n c y . The p l a i n t i f f i s e n t i t l e d t o
r e c o v e r f e e s b a s e d on t h e i r r e a s o n a b le
worth , i . e . , market v a l u e . " P erk in s v .
S t a t e B oard o f E d u c a t i o n , No. 7 7 -3 5 5 2
s l i p o p . a t 3 - 4 (M.D. Tenn. Nov. 4 ,
1980) . The t e x t o f Judge M o r t o n 's o r d e r s
u n d e r m in e s Mr. B e l t o n ' s a s s e r t i o n th a t
h i s f e e was n o t c a l c u l a t e d b a s e d on
m arket r a t e as r e q u i r e d by B lum . In
a d d i t i o n , in P erk in s Judge Morton awarded
R i c h a r d Manson, a N a s h v i l l e a t t o r n e y in
15a
p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e , a f e e c a l c u l a t e d a t a
r a t e o f $75 p er hour f o r 1982.
The r e d u c t i o n in Mr. B e l t o n ' s r a t e s
i s a l s o s u p p o r t e d by t h e f a c t th a t in
t h i s c a s e Ms . A r t h u r r e q u e s t e d an
a t t o r n e y f e e c a l c u l a t e d a t the r a t e o f
$85 p e r h ou r f o r a l l t h r e e y e a r s . The
p a r t i e s a g r e e t h a t u n d e r t h e c o n s e n t
o r d e r Ms. Arthur was p a id $85 per hour
f o r a l l o f the work she d i d . Mr. B e l t o n
a r g u e s t h a t t h i s r e f e r e n c e t o Ms.
A r t h u r ' s r a t e c o n s t i t u t e s the a d m iss io n
o f a " s e t t l e m e n t . . . t o red u ce the amount
o f a c la im " in c o n t r a v e n t i o n o f Rule 408
o f t h e F e d e r a l R u l e s o f E v i d e n c e .
B e l t o n ' s B r i e f a t 1 8 -1 9 . Rule 408 d oes
p r o h i b i t the a d m iss io n o f " [ e ] v i d e n c e o f
. . . a c c e p t i n g . . . v a l u a b l e c o n s i d e r a t i o n
i n c o m p r o m i s i n g . . . a c l a i m which was
d i s p u t e d as t o e i t h e r v a l i d i t y o r amount,
16a
. . . t o p r o v e l i a b i l i t y f o r o r i n v a l i d i t y
o f t h e c l a i m o r i t s am ount . " However,
t h e r u l e a l l o w s . t h e a d m i s s i o n o f such
e v i d e n c e f o r o t h e r p u r p o s e s . In t h i s
c a s e , r e f e r e n c e t o the s e t t l e m e n t i s f o r
t h e s t a t i s t i c a l p u rp o s e o f e s t a b l i s h i n g
t h e market r a t e p r e v a i l i n g in N a s h v i l l e
f o r th e s o r t o f l e g a l s e r v i c e s r e n d e r e d
by Mr. B e l t o n . L a y i n g t h e s e t t l e m e n t
a s i d e , r e c o r d e v i d e n c e e s t a b l i s h e s th a t
Ms. A r th u r , d e s c r i b e d by Judge Morton as
an " e x c e l l e n t " and h i g h l y e f f e c t i v e t r i a l
lawyer in N a s h v i l l e , sou g h t $85 p e r hour
f o r h e r s e r v i c e s i n th e same T i t l e VII
c a s e . The r e d u c e d f i g u r e s r e a s o n a b l y
r e f l e c t the market r a t e i n N a s h v i l l e a t
the t ime the s e r v i c e s were r e n d e r e d , the
r a t e s n e c e s s a r y t o h i r e com petent lawyer
t o u n d e r t a k e t h e w ork i n q u e s t i o n i n
a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e p r i n c i p l e s t a t e d
17a
above th a t " f e e awards s h o u ld n o t e x c e e d
t h e market r a t e s n e c e s s a r y t o e n co u r a g e
c o m p e t e n t l a w y e r s t o u n d e r t a k e t h e
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n q u e s t i o n . "
HOURS EXPENDED
T h e s e c o n d i s s u e — t h e
r e a s o n a b l e n e s s o f the hou rs c la im e d by
Mr. B e l t o n - - i l l u s t r a t e s an o b v i o u s
i n a d e q u a c y i n t h e " l o d e s t a r " method o f
c a l c u l a t i o n . The r a t e s - t i m e s - h o u r s
a p p r o a c h i s a s u f f i c i e n t s t a n d a r d when
t h e r e i s no prob lem about th e hou rs o f
s e r v i c e p e r fo r m e d , but i t d o e s n o t s o l v e
t h e p r o b l e m o f e x c e s s i v e h o u r s . See
R eport o f T h ird C i r c u i t Task F o r c e , 108
F . R. D. 237, 247-49 ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Hours sp e n t
i n c o u r t a n d a t d e p o s i t i o n s c a n b e
v e r i f i e d and r e v i e w e d . Hours sp e n t in
r e v i e w i n g r e c o r d s , t a l k i n g t o o t h e r
l a w y e r s o r e x p e r t s , p r e p a r i n g l e g a l
18a
d o c u m e n t s and the l i k e cannot be f u l l y
v e r i f i e d and r e q u i r e the c o u r t t o t r u s t
the l a w y e r ' s word th a t the hours c la im ed
r e p r e s e n t n e c e s s a r y w o r k a c t u a l l y
p e r f o r m e d . Depending on the s i t u a t i o n ,
t h e l a w y e r may h a v e s t r o n g e c o n o m i c
i n c e n t i v e s t o spend t o o many hours on a
p i e c e o f work o r t o e x a g g e r a t e the number
o f h o u r s s p e n t o r t h e n e c e s s i t y o r
im portance o f the work. S i m i l a r l y , i t i s
o f t e n d i f f i c u l t t o a s s e s s the need f o r
t w o l a w y e r s a t a d e p o s i t i o n , an
i n t e r v i e w , o r a t r i a l .
Mr. B e l t o n r e q u e s t e d f e e s f o r 185.59
h o u r s . Judge Morton c u t out 55 h ou rs .
T h e D i s t r i c t J u d g e e l i m i n a t e d a s
e x c e s s i v e o r u n n e c e s s a r y 8 o f t h e 13
h o u r s c l a i m e d f o r p r e p a r i n g h i s f e e
r e q u e s t ; a l l o f the 16 .75 hours c la im ed
f o r p r e p a r i n g , f i l i n g , and a rg u in g what
19a
t h e D i s t r i c t J u d ge c h a r a c t e r i z e d as a
" f u t i l e " summary judgment m ot ion ; 22 o f
t h e 4 4 h o u r s i n p r e p a r i n g t h e
s t i p u l a t i o n s and the p r e t r i a l b r i e f ; and
9 o f 18 h o u r s c l a i m e d f o r t r i a l
p r e p a r a t i o n .
Three v e r y d i f f e r e n t k in d s o f i s s u e s
ca n a r i s e c o n c e r n i n g e x c e s s i v e h o u r s :
( 1 ) f a c t u a l q u e s t i o n s about whether the
lawyer a c t u a l l y worked the hours c la im ed
o r i s p a d d i n g t h e a c c o u n t ; ( 2 ) l e g a l
q u e s t i o n s a b o u t w h e t h e r t h e w o r k
per form ed i s s u f f i c i e n t l y r e l a t e d t o the
p o i n t s on which the c l i e n t p r e v a i l e d as
t o b e c o m p e n s a b l e ; a n d ( 3 ) m i x e d
q u e s t i o n s about whether the lawyer used
p oor judgment in spend ing t o o many hours
o n s o m e p a r t o f t h e c a s e o r b y
u n n e c e s s a r i l y d u p l i c a t i n g the work o f c o
c o u n s e l . On the f i r s t ty pe o f f a c t u a l
20a
q u e s t i o n we a p p ly the c l e a r l y e r ro n e o u s
s t a n d a r d . On t h e s e c o n d we d e te r m in e
whether the D i s t r i c t Court e r r e d . On the
t h i r d c o n c e r n in g b i l l i n g judgment we l o o k
t o s e e whether the D i s t r i c t C ourt , based
on e x p e r i e n c e and the r e c o r d in the c a s e ,
m i s a p p l i e d t h e r e a s o n a b l e b i l l i n g
p r a c t i c e s o f the p r o f e s s i o n .
On t h e q u e s t i o n o f e x c e s s i v e hours
we h a v e t h r e e i s s u e s , none o f w h i c h
i n v o l v e a q u e s t i o n o f p a d d i n g ,
m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , o r d i s h o n e s t
a c c o u n t i n g . The f i r s t q u e s t i o n i n v o l v e s
t h e t i m e s p e n t i n p r e p a r i n g a n d
p r e s e n t i n g the a t t o r n e y f e e p e t i t i o n and
a c c o m p a n y i n g d o c u m e n t a t i o n a f t e r t h e
c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e was o v e r . The secon d
i n v o l v e s p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e summary
j u d g m e n t m o t i o n . B o t h r a i s e l e g a l
q u e s t i o n s o f c o m p e n s a b i l i t y . The t h i r d
21a
i n v o l v e s the p r e p a r a t i o n o f documents and
r a i s e s a q u e s t i o n o f b i l l i n g judgment.
P r e p a r a t i o n o f Fee A p p l i c a t i o n . - -
A l t h o u g h t i m e s p e n t i n p r e p a r i n g ,
p r e s e n t i n g , a nd t r y i n g a t t o r n e y f e e
a p p l i c a t i o n s i s c o m p e n s a b l e ; som e
g u i d e l i n e s and l i m i t a t i o n s must be p l a c e d
on the s i z e o f t h e s e f e e s . O therwise the
p r o s p e c t o f l a r g e f e e s l a t e r on may
d i s c o u r a g e e a r l y s e t t l e m e n t o f c a s e s by
r e w a r d i n g p r o t r a c t e d l i t i g a t i o n o f b o th
t h e c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e and the a t t o r n e y
f e e c a s e .
T h e c a s e s' f r o m t h i s a nd o t h e r
c i r c u i t s u n i f o r m l y h o l d t h a t a la w yer
s h o u l d r e c e i v e a f e e f o r p r e p a r in g and
s u c c e s s f u l l y l i t i g a t i n g the a t t o r n e y f e e
c a s e a f t e r t h e o r i g i n a l c a s e i s o v e r ,
a l t h o u g h i n t h e p r i v a t e m arket p l a c e ,
l a w y e r s d o n o t u s u a l l y c h a r g e , and
22a
c l i e n t s do not u s u a l l y pay, f o r the time
i t ta k es la w yers t o c a l c u l a t e t h e i r f e e s .
See c a s e s c o l l e c t e d and d i s c u s s e d in In
r e Nucorp Energy, I n c . , 764 F. 2d 655, 660
( 9 t h C i r . 1985) . The l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t
b e h i n d a t t o r n e y f e e s t a t u t e s , however ,
w a s t o e n c o u r a g e l a w y e r s t o b r i n g
s u c c e s s f u l c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s , n o t
s u c c e s s f u l a t t o r n e y f e e c a s e s . The
a t t o r n e y f e e c a s e i s n o t t h e c a s e
C o n g r e s s e x p r e s s e d i t s i n t e n t t o
en co u ra g e ; and in o r d e r t o be in c l u d e d ,
i t mus t r i d e p i g g y b a c k on t h e c i v i l
r i g h t s c a s e .
J u d g e M o r t o n s t r u c k t h e r i g h t
b a l a n c e . He l i m i t e d t h e s e h o u r s t o
a p p r o x im a te ly 3% o f the hours a l l o w e d in
the main c a s e . In the a b sen ce o f unusual
c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e h o u r s a l l o w e d f o r
p r e p a r in g and l i t i g a t i n g the a t t o r n e y f e e
23a
c a s e sh ou ld not ex ce e d 3% o f the hours In
the main c a s e when the i s s u e i s su b m it ted
on the papers w i th o u t a t r i a l and sh o u ld
n o t e x c e e d 5% o f the hours in the main
c a s e when a t r i a l i s n e c e s s a r y . Such
g u i d e l i n e s and l i m i t a t i o n s a r e n e c e s s a r y
t o in s u r e th a t the com p ensat ion from the
a t t o r n e y f e e c a s e w i l l n o t be o u t o f
p r o p o r t i o n t o the main c a s e and encou rage
p r o t r a c t e d l i t i g a t i o n .
Summary J u d g m e n t M o t i o n . - - On
s u mma r y j u d g m e n t m o t i o n s a n d o t h e r
s i m i l a r m ot ions that go t o a p a r t i c u l a r
i s s u e in a c a s e , the q u e s t i o n sh o u ld be
w h e t h e r the p erson s e e k in g com pensat ion
p r e v a i l e d on t h e m o t i o n or i n t he end
p r e v a i l e d on t h e i s s u e r a i s e d i n t h e
m otion in p a r t as a r e s u l t o f the m ot ion .
T h i s p a r t i c u l a r summary judgment m otion
a d v a n c e d Mr. B e l t o n ' s c a s e and was a
24a
f a c t o r in w in n ing . His summary judgment
m o t i o n show ed th a t h i s c l i e n t had made
o u t a p r i m a f a c i e e m p l o y m e n t
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n c a s e and th a t the s t a t e
had f a i l e d t o p l e a d o r o t h e r w i s e come
f o r w a r d w i t h a v a l i d r e a s o n f o r t h e
f a i l u r e t o p r o m o t e t h e p l a i n t i f f as
r e b u t t a l t o the prima f a c i e c a s e . As a
r e s u l t o f t h e m ot ion the s t a t e amended
i t s p l e a d i n g t o a l l e g e a j u s t i f i c a t i o n ,
and Ms. Arthur and Mr. B e l t o n were then
a b l e t o show th a t the j u s t i f i c a t i o n the
s t a t e advanced was a p r e t e x t . Thus, Mr.
B e l t o n ' s summary judgment m ot ion narrowed
t h e i s s u e i n t h e c a s e and h e l p e d h i s
c l i e n t win a t the t r i a l . The 16 hours o r
2 d a y s Mr. B e l t o n sp en t on t h i s m otion
sh o u ld be a l l o w e d .
25a
P r e p a r a t i o n of Stipulations,
P r e t r i a l B r i e f , and f o r T r i a l . — When
the i s s u e i s a q u e s t i o n o f the l a w y e r ' s
ju d g m e n t i n b i l l i n g f o r a p a r t i c u l a r
number o f hours on a p i e c e o f work, we
must d e p e n d i n l a r g e r m e a su re on t h e
f a i r n e s s o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i n
a s s e s s i n g the needs o f the c a s e . Under
t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s p r e s e n t e d h e r e , we do
n o t b e l i e v e t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t a c t e d
a r b i t r a r i l y o r i r r a t i o n a l l y in r e d u c in g
the p r e t r i a l p r e p a r a t i o n hours from 62 t o
31 . Ms. A rthur was lea d t r i a l c o u n s e l
and c o n d u c t e d t h e t r i a l i t s e l f . Mr.
B e l t o n prepa red e x t e n s i v e s t i p u l a t i o n s o f
f a c t , based in major p a r t on answers t o
p r e v i o u s i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s he had p re p a re d ,
a n d a n a b l e t r i a l b r i e f . H i s
c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e c a s e and h i s
s t i p u l a t i o n s and b r i e f c o n t r i b u t e d t o a
26a
s u c c e s s f u l outcom e, but we d e f e r t o the
v iew o f the t r i a l judge th a t 31 hours or
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 w o r k i n g d a y s w a s
s u f f i c i e n t f o r t h e s e t a s k s . Judges w i l l
d i f f e r on q u e s t i o n s o f t h i s k in d , but our
own e x p e r i e n c e as l a w y e r s and j u d g e s
t e l l s us th a t the D i s t r i c t Judge has not
e x e r c i s e d h i s d i s c r e t i o n and e x p e r t i s e on
t h i s mixed q u e s t i o n o f law and f a c t in an
a r b i t r a r y o r u n f a i r way. Judge Morton
g a v e Mr. B e l t o n c r e d i t f o r a l l o f the
more th a n 3 d a y s t im e he sp en t a t the
d e p o s i t i o n s and s h o r t t r i a l c o n d u c t e d
a l t o g e t h e r by Ms. A r th u r . He d id so on
t h e t h e o r y that m u l t i p l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
can be p r o d u c t i v e . But t h e r e i s a l s o the
d a n g e r o f d u p l i c a t i o n , a w a s t e o f
r e s o u r c e s which i s d i f f i c u l t t o measure.
Where d u p l i c a t i o n o f e f f o r t i s a s e r i o u s
p r o b l e m , as i n t h i s c a s e , the D i s t r i c t
27a
Court may have t o make a c r o s s the board
r e d u c t i o n s by r e d u c in g c e r t a i n i tems by a
p e r c e n t a g e f i g u r e , as Judge Morton d id
here i n r e d u c in g t h i s item by 50%.
A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e d e c i s i o n s o f the
D i s t r i c t Court as t o the h o u r ly r a t e and
the hours a l l o w e d f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n o f
t h e a t t o r n e y f e e c a s e and the p r e t r i a l
s t i p u l a t i o n s and b r i e f a re a f f i r m e d . The
d e c i s i o n on t h e h o u r s a l l o w e d on t h e
m o t i o n f o r summary judgment i s r e v e r s e d
and t h e c a s e remanded t o t h e D i s t r i c t
Court t o r e c a l c u l a t e the f e e s t o i n c lu d e
t h e se h o u r s .
WELLFORD, C i r c u i t Judge, c o n c u r r i n g
in p a r t and d i s s e n t i n g in p a r t .
I a g r e e w i t h Jud ge M e r r i t t ' s w e l l
c o n s i d e r e d o p i n i o n w ith r e s p e c t t o a l l
a s p e c t s o f t h i s f e e c o n t r o v e r s y e x c e p t
w ith that p a r t d e a l i n g w ith the summary
28a
ju d g m e n t m o t i o n . (P a g e 1 5 1 . ) Jud ge
M o r t o n had f i r s t hand o p p o r t u n i t y t o
c o n s i d e r t h e r o l e and s i g n i f i c a n c e o f
t h i s m ot ion in making h i s r u l i n g . In my
ju d g m e n t , i t had l i t t l e t o do w ith the
f i n a l outcome e x c e p t perhaps t o "narrow
the i s s u e in the c a s e " as found by Judge
M e r r i t t . I would t h e r e f o r e on remand t o
t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t a l l o w th a t c o u r t t o
d e t e r m i n e on f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n what
p o r t i o n o f the hours sp en t on the summary
judgment sh o u ld be a l l o w e d t o Mr. B e l t o n
f o r h i s s e r v i c e s a f t e r t a k i n g i n t o
a c c o u n t the r a t i o n a l e e x p r e s s e d by t h i s
c o u r t h e r e i n .
29a
APPENDIX A
F ed era l S t a t u t e s A u t h o r i z i n g the
Award o f A t t o r n e y Fees
A c t t o P r e v e n t P o l l u t i o n from S h ip s , 3
U .S .C . § 1910(d)
A ge D i s c r i m i n a t i o n A c t o f 1975 (a s
amended by Pub.L. 9 5 -4 7 8 , § 401) U .S .C .
§ 6 1 0 4 (e )
Age D i s c r i m i n a t i o n in Employment Act o f
1967, 29 U .S .C . § 626(b )
A g r i c u l t u r a l U n f a i r Trade P r a c t i c e s , 7
U.S .C . § 2 3 0 5 ( a ) , ( c )
A la s k a N a t iv e Claims S e t t le m e n t A c t , 43
U .S .C . § 1619
A l i e n Owners o f Land, 48 U .S .C . § 1506
Atomic Energy Act o f 1954, 42 U.S .C.
§ 2184
Bank H o ld ing Company A c t , 12 U .S .C .
§ 1975
B a n k r u p t c y A c t , 1 U . S . C . § § 1 0 9 ,
2 0 5 ( c ) ( 1 2 ) , 6 3 2 , 641, 642, 643, 644,
1975
Bankruptcy Reform Act (Pub.L . 9 5 - 5 9 8 ) , 11
U . S . C . §§ 3 0 3 ( i ) , 3 3 0 ( a ) , 3 6 3 ( n ) ,
503(b )
30a
B lack Lung B e n e f i t s A c t , 30 U .S .C .
§ 9 3 2 (a )
C i v i l R i g h t s Act o f 1964, T i t l e I I , 42
U .S .C . § 2 0 0 0 a -3 (b )
C i v i l R ig h t s Act o f 1964, T i t l e V I I , 42
U.S .C. § 2 0 0 0 e -5 (k )
C i v i l R ig h ts A t t o r n e y ' s Fees Awards Act
Of 1976, 42 U .S .C . § 1988
C i v i l S e r v i c e Reform Act o f 1978 (Pub.L .
9 5 -4 5 4 , §§ 205, 7 0 2 ) , 5 U.S .C.
§§ 5 5 9 6 ( b ) ( 1 ) , 7 7 01 (g )
C la y ton A c t , 15 U .S .C . § 15
Clean A ir Act (as amended by Pub.L . 9 5 -
9 5 ) , 42 U .S .C . §§ 7 4 1 3 ( b ) , 7 6 0 4 ( d ) ,
7 6 0 7 ( f ) , 7 6 2 2 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ) , ( e ) ( 2 )
Coal Mine S a f e t y A c t , 30 U .S .C .S § 9 3 8 ( c )
Coast Guard A c t , 14 U .S .C . § 4 3 1 ( c )
Commodity Futures Trad ing Commission Act
o f 1974, 7 U .S .C . § 1 8 ( f ) , (g)
Communications Act o f 1934, 47 U.S .C.
§§ 206, 407
Condominium and C o o p e r a t iv e Abuse R e l i e f
A c t o f 1 9 8 0 , 15 U . S . C . §§ 3 6 0 8 ( d ) ,
3609, 3611
Consumer L eas ing A c t , 15 U .S .C .
§ 1667b( a )
31a
Consumer P rod u ct S a f e t y A c t , 15 U .S .C .
§§ 2 0 6 0 ( c ) , 2 0 6 0 ( f ) , 2 0 7 2 ( a ) , 2073
C o n tra c t D is p u te s Act o f 1978, 41 U.S. C.
§ 601 e t s e q .
C op y r ig h t A c t , 17 U .S .C . § 505
C o u n s e l ' s L i a b i l i t y f o r E x c e s s i v e C o s t s ,
28 U .S .C . § 1927
C r i m i n a l C o d e , 18 U . S . C . §§ 3 0 Q 6 A (d ) ,
3495
Deep S ea b ed Hard M in e ra l R e so u rc e s Act
30 U. S. C. § 1 4 27 (c )
Deepwater P o r t s A c t , 33 U .S .C . § 1515(d )
E c o n o m i c O p p o r t u n i t y A c t o f 1 9 6 4 , 42
U.S.C § 2701 e t s e q .
E l e c t r o n i c Fund T r a n s fe r Act (Pub .L . 9 5 -
630, T i t l e XX) , 15 U .S .C . § 1693m(a) ,
( f )
Employee R et irem en t Income S e c u r i t y A c t ,
29 U .S .C . § 1132(g )
Endangered S p e c i e s A c t , 16 U.S.C
§ 1 5 4 0 ( g ) (4)
E n e rg y P o l i c y and C o n s e r v a t io n A c t , 42
U.S. C. § 6305(d )
E n erg y R e o r g a n i z a t i o n A c t o f 1974 (as
amended by Pub.L . 9 5 - 6 0 1 ) , 42 U. S. C.
§§ 5 8 5 1 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ) , ( e ) (2)
32a
Equal A cc e s s t o J u s t i c e A c t , 5 U. S. C.
§ 504, 28 U. S. C. § 2412
Equal C r e d i t O p p o r tu n i ty A c t , 15 U. S. C.
§ 16 9 1 e (d )
E t h i c s in Government Act o f 1978 (Pub.L .
9 5 -5 2 1 , § 7 1 0 ( d ) ) , 2 U. S. C. § 1692k
F a ir C r e d i t R e p o r t in g A c t , 15 U .S .C .
§§ 1681n, o
F a i r D e b t C o l l e c t i o n P r a c t i c e s A c t
(Pub.L . 9 5 -1 0 9 , § 8 1 3 - ( a ) ) , 15 U. S. C.
§ 1692k
F a ir Housing Act o f 1968, 42 U.S. C.
§ 3 612 ( c )
F a ir Labor Standards A c t , 29 U. S. C.
§ 216( b)
F ed era l C on tes ted E l e c t r o n A c t , 2 U. S. C.
§ 396
F ed e ra l C r e d i t Union A c t , 12 U.S. C.
§ 1786(o )
F ed e ra l D e p o s i t Insura n ce A c t , 12 U. S. C.
§ 1818 (n)
F ed era l Employment Compensation f o r Work
I n j u r i e s , 5 U. S. C. § 8127
F e d e r a l Mine S a f e t y and H ealth A c t , 30
U. S. C. § 8 1 5 ( c ) ( 3 ) (added by Pub.L . 9 5 -
164 ) , 30 U. S. C. § 9 3 8 ( c )
33a
F ed era l Power Act (as amended by Pub.L .
9 5 - 6 1 7 , § 2 1 2 ) , 16 U . S . C . § 8 2 5 o l -
( b ) ( 2 )
F e d e r a l R u l e s o f A p p e l l a t e P r o c e d u r e ,
App. Rule 38 (28 U . S . C . )
F e d e r a l R u l e s o f C i v i l P r o c e d u r e , App.
Rules 37, 5 6 ( g ) , (28 U. S . C . )
F ed era l Trade Commission Improvement A c t ,
15 U. S. C. §§ 5 7 a ( h ) ( 1 )
F e d e r a l W a t e r P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l A c t
Amendment o f 1972, 33 U. S. C. § 1365(d)
Fees and C o s t s , 28 U.S.C § 1912, § 1927
F o r e ig n I n t e l l i g e n c e S u r v e i l l a n c e Act o f
1978 (Pub.L . 9 5 -5 1 1 , § 110) , 50 U. S. C.
§ 181 .
Freedom o f I n f o r m a t io n A c t , 5 U. S. C.
§ 5 5 2 ( a ) ( 4 ) ( E )
Government in the Sunshine A c t , 5 U. S. C.
§ 5 5 2 ( b ) ( 1 )
Guam Organic Act (Pub.L . 9 5 -1 3 4 , § 2 04) ,
48 U. S. C. § 14 2 4 c ( f )
H a r t - S c o t t - R o d i n o A n t i t r u s t Improvements
A c t o f 1976 , 15 U.S. C. §§ 1 5 c ( a ) ( 2 ) ,
( d ) ( 2 ) , 26
Hobby P r o t e c t i o n A c t , 15 U. S. C. § 2102
Home Owners Loan Act o f 1933, 12 U.S. C.
§ 1 4 6 4 ( d ) (8)
34a
H o u s i n g a n d C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t
Amendments o f 1979 (Pub.L . 9 6 -1 5 3 ,
§ 4 0 5 ) , 15 U. S. C. § 1709
I n d i a n Claims Commission A c t , 25 U. S. C.
§§ 7 0 n , 70V-3 ( a ) , (added by Pub.L. 9 5 -
69)
In d ian C o n t r a c t A c t , 25 U. S. C. §§ 81, 82,
8 2 ( a ) , 85
In d ia n R e o r g a n i z a t i o n A c t , 25 U. S. C.
§ 476
I n t e r n a t i o n a l Claims S e t t le m e n t A c t , 22
U . S . C . §§ 1 6 2 3 ( f ) , 16 31 ( j ) , 1 6 41 ( p ) ,
1642( m ) , 1643 ( k ) , 1644(1)
I n t e r s t a t e Commerce A c t , 49 U.S.C.
§§ 1 1 7 0 5 ( d ) ( 3 ) , 1 1 7 0 8 ( c ) , 1 1 7 1 0 ( b ) ,
1 1 7 1 1 ( d ) , 11711(e )
J a p a n e s e - A m e r i c a n E va cu a t ion Claims Act
o f 1948, 50 U. S. C. App. § 1985
J e w e le r s Hall -Mark A c t , 15 U.S. C.
§ 2 9 8 ( b ) , ( c ) , (d)
J u r y S y s tem I m p ro v e m e n ts A c t o f 1978
(Pub.L . 9 5 -9 7 2 , § 6 ) , 28 U.S. C.
§ 1 8 7 5 ( d ) (2)
Labor-Management R e p o r t in g and D i s c l o s u r e
A c t o f 1 9 5 9 , 29 U . S . C . §§ 4 3 1 ( c ) ,
501( b)
Lega l S e r v i c e s C o r p o r a t i o n A c t , 42 U. S. C.
§ 2 9 9 6 e ( f )
35a
L o n g s h o r e m e n ' s a n d H a r b o r W o r k e r s '
Compensation A c t , 33 U. S. C.
§§ 465, 3 9 9 ( e ) ( 1 ) , 928.
Magnuson-Moss Warranty A c t , 15 U. S. C.
§ 2 3 1 0 ( d ) (2)
M a r i n e P r o t e c t i o n , R e s e a r c h , a n d
S a n c t u a r i e s A c t , 33 U.S. C. 1 4 1 5 ( g ) ( 4 )
Merchant Marine Act o f 1936, 46 U. S. C.
§ 1227
Mexican-Am erican Chamizal C on v en t ion Act
o f 1946, 22 U. S. C. § 277d-21
M i l i t a r y P erso n n e l and C i v i l i a n Employees
Claims Act o f 1964, 31 U. S. C. § 243
M o b i l e Home C o n s t r u c t i o n and S a f e t y
Standards A c t , 42 U. S. C. §§ 5412( b)
M o t o r V e h i c l e I n f o r m a l i o n a nd C o s t
S a v i n g s A c t , 15 U . S . C . §§ 1 9 1 8 ( a ) ,
1989(a )
N a t io n a l Guard A c t , 32 U. S. C. § 334
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c P r e s e r v a t i o n A c t , 16
U. S. C. § 470W-4
N a t io n a l Housing A c t , 12 U. S. C.
§ 1730( m) ( 3 )
N a t io n a l T r a f f i c and Motor V e h i c l e S a f e t y
Act o f 1966, 15 U. S. C. § 1400(b )
N a t u r a l Gas P i p e l i n e S a f e t y A c t , 42
U. S. C. § 1 686 (e )
36a
N oise C o n t r o l Act o f 1972, 42 U. S. C.
§ 4911 (d )
N o rr is -L a G u a rd ia Ac t , 29 U. S. C. § 107( e )
Ocean Dumping A c t , 33 U. S. C. § 1 4 1 5 ( g ) ( 4 )
Ocean Thermal Energy C o n s e r v a t io n Act o f
1980, 42 U.S. C. § 9124( d)
Omnibus Crim e C o n t r o l and S a fe S t r e e t s
Act o f 1968, 42 U. S. C. § 3 7 6 6 ( c ) ( 4 ) ( B )
Organized Crime C o n t r o l Act o f 1970, 18
U. S. C. § 1964( c )
O u te r C o n t i n e n t a l S h e l f Lands A c t (as
amended by Pub. L . 9 5 - 3 7 2 ) , 43 U.S. C.
§ 1 3 4 9 ( a ) ( 5 ) , ( b ) ( 2 )
Packers and S to ck y a rd s A c t , 7 U.S. C.
§ 2 1 0 ( f )
Patent I n f r in g e m e n t , 32 U. S. C. § 285
P e r i s h a b l e A g r i c u l t u r a l Commodities Ac t ,
7 U. S. C. § 4 9 9 g ( b ) , ( c )
P e t r o l e u m Marketing P r a c t i c e s Act (Pub.
L. 9 5 -2 9 7 , § 1 0 5 ( d ) , 15 U. S. C.
§ 2 8 0 5 ( d ) ( 1 ) , (3)
P la n t V a r i e t y A c t , 7 U. S. C. § 2565
P r i v a c y A c t , 5 U . S . C . § 5 5 2a (g ) (2 ) (B) ,
( 3 ) ( B ) , (4)
Powerplant and I n d u s t r i a l Fuel Use Act o f
1978, 42 U. S. C. § 8435(d)
37a
P u b l i c U t i l i t y H o l d i n g Company A ct o f
1935, 15 U. S. C. § 7 9 g ( d ) ( 4 ) , 7 9 j ( b ) ( 2 )
P u b l i c U t i l i t y R e g u la to r y P o l i c e s Act o f
1978 (Pub .L . 9 5 -6 1 7 , § 12 2 ) , 16 U. S. C.
§ 2632(a )
R a i l r o a d R e v i t a l i z a t i o n and Reform A c t ,
45 U.S. C. § 854( g )
R a i l r o a d Unemployment In su ra n ce A c t , 45
U. S. C. § 3 5 5 ( i )
Rai lway Labor A c t , 45 U. S. C. 1 53 (p)
Real E s t a t e S e t t le m e n t P ro ce d u r e s Act o f
1974, 12 U. S. C. § 2607(d )
R e h a b i l i t a t i o n Act o f 1973 (as amended by
Pub.L. 9 5 -6 0 2 , § 120) , 29 U. S. C.
§ 7 9 4 a ( b )
R i g h t t o F i n a n c i a l P r iv a c y Act o f 1978
( P u b . L . 9 5 - 6 3 0 §§ 1 1 1 7 ( a ) , 1118) , 12
U. S. C. §§ 3 4 1 7 ( a ) , 3418
S a fe D r ink ing Water A c t , 42 U.S. C.
§§ 300 j - 8 ( d ) , 9 ( i ) ( 2 ) ( B ) ( i i )
S e c u r i t i e s Act o f 1933, 15 U.S. C.
§ 7 7 k ( e )
S e c u r i t i e s E x c h a n g e A c t o f 1 9 34 , 15
U. S. C. § 7 8 r ( a)
S e c u r i t i e s I n v e s t o r P r o t e c t i o n A c t , 15
U. S. C. § 7 8 e e e (b ) (Pub. L. 9 5 -2 8 3 ,
§ 7 ( b ) ( 5 ) )
38a
S e r v i c e m e n 's Group L i f e Insura n ce Ac t , 38
U. S. C. § 7 8 4 ( g ) '
Sex D i s c r i m i n a t i o n P r o h i b i t i o n ( T i t l e IX
o f Pub.L . 9 2 - 3 1 8 ) , 20 U. S. C. § 1681 e t
s e q . See 42 U. S. C. § 1988
S o c i a l S e c u r i t y Act Amendments o f 1965,
42 U.S. C. § 406
S o l i d Waste D i s p o s a l A c t , 42 U.S. C.
§§ 6 9 7 1 ( c ) , 6972( e )
S t a t e a n d L o c a l F i s c a l A s s i s t a n c e
Amendment o f 1976, 31 U. S. C. § 1244(e )
S u r f a c e M in in g C o n t r o l and R ec la m at ion
Act ( Pub. L. 9 5 - 8 7 ) , 30 U.S.C §§ 1270(d)
( f ) , 1 2 7 5 ( e ) , 1293 ( c )
Tax Reform Act o f 1976, 26 U. S. C.
§ 6 1 1 0 ( i ) ( 2 )
T o x i c S u bstances C o n t r o l Ac t , 15 U. S. C.
§§ 2 6 0 5 ( c ) ( 4 ) ( A ) , 2 6 1 8 ( d ) , 2 6 1 9 ( c ) ( 2 ) ,
2 6 2 0 ( b ) ( 4 ) ( C ) , 2 6 2 2 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B )
Trademark A c t , 15 U. S. C. § 1117
T r a d i n g Wi t h t h e Enemy A c t , 50 U.S. C.
App. § 20
Trust Inden tu re Ac t , 15 U.S. C.
§ 7 7 0 0 0 ( e ) , www(a)
Truth in Lending A c t , 15 U.S. C.
§ 1640(a)
U n fa ir C o m p e t i t i o n A c t , 15 U. S. C. § 72
Un i f o r m R e l o c a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e and Real
39a
Un i f o r m R e l o c a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e and Real
P r o p e r t y A c q u i s i t i o n P o l i c i e s A c t , 42
U. S. C. § 4654
U nited S t a t e s as a P a r t y , 28 U. S. C,
§ 2412
V e te r a n s ' B e n e f i t s Ac t , 38 U. S. C.
§ 3 404 ( c )
V o t i n g R i g h t s Amendment o f 1 9 7 5 , 42
U. S. C. § 19731(e )
War Hazards Compensation A c t , 42 U. S. C.
§ 1714
W ater P o l l u t i o n P r e v e n t i o n and C o n t r o l
A c t , 33 U. S. C. §§ 1 3 6 5 ( d ) , 1367( c )
Wire I n t e r c e p t i o n A c t , 18 U. S. C. § 2520
40a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
MARY LOUCILLE COULTER )
)
v s . ) NO. 3 -8 3 -0 6 6 8
)
STATE OF TENNESSEE; )
DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION,)
ET AL. )
M E M 0 R A N D U M
The l e a d i n g t r i a l a t t o r n e y in t h i s
c a s e was A l e t a G. A rth u r , who has been
a l l o w e d a f e e f o r h e r s e r v i c e s a t the
r a t e o f $85 p er hour and which r e s u l t e d
i n t h e a l l o w a n c e o f a f e e o f $ 1 3 ,0 0 0 .
R obert B e l t o n , a member o f the s t a f f o f
V a n d e r b i l t U n i v e r s i t y Law S c h o o l , has
l i k e w i s e f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r s e r v i c e s
rend ered in s a i d c a s e and re q u e s t e d f e e s
41a
f o r s e r v i c e s as f o l l o w s :
f o r s e r v i c e s ren d ered in 1982, $110
per h o u r ;
f o r s e r v i c e s r e n d e r e d i n 1983 and
1984, $125 per hour .
The f i r s t t h i n g t h a t s t r i k e s t h e
c o u r t as b e i n g unusual in t h i s c a s e i s
t h a t i n t h e c a s e o f P e r k i n s v . S t a t e
B oard o f E d u c a t i o n , Case No. 7 7 - 3 5 5 2 ,
B e l t o n f i l e d a p e t i t i o n and a f f i d a v i t
w ith t h i s c o u r t on O c tob er 15, 1984, in
w h i c h he i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r s e r v i c e s
r e n d e r e d i n 1982 , h i s f e e was $85 per
h o u r and f o r 1983 and 1984 i t was $120
p e r h o u r . I t seem s t o the c o u r t when
a f f i d a v i t s a r e s u b m i t t e d i n c a s e s f o r
s e r v i c e s ren d ered in the same p e r i o d o f
t ime th ey sh o u ld a t l e a s t be c o n s i s t e n t .
T h i s c o u r t w i l l t r e a t the a t t o r n e y f e e
p e t i t i o n a c c o r d i n g l y .
42a
I f t h e r e e v e r was a s i m p l e c a s e
f i l e d under T i t l e VII o f the C i v i l R ig h ts
A c t , t h i s i s t h e c a s e . The c a s e was
t r i e d in l e s s than h a l f a day , and the
c o u r t d e c i d e d the c a s e from the bench .
I n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e c a s e f o u r
d e p o s i t i o n s were taken , and s e v e r a l form
i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s a n d r e q u e s t s f o r
a d m i s s i o n s were f i l e d . Mr. B e l t o n has
asked f o r f e e s t o t a l i n g $ 2 2 ,0 0 0 , and the
l e a d c o u n s e l has r e q u e s t e d and r e c e i v e d a
f e e o f $ 1 3 ,0 0 0 . The c o u r t i s aware th a t
Mr. B e l t o n i s a c o m p e t e n t a t t o r n e y .
However, the c o u r t i s l i k e w i s e aware that
M r s . A r t h u r i s an e x c e l l e n t t r i a l
a t t o r n e y w i th y e a r s o f e x p e r i e n c e as an
a s s i s t a n t United S t a t e s A t t o r n e y and in
p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e . She has p o i s e and
commands g r e a t r e s p e c t i n a d d i t i o n to
b e in g an e x c e l l e n t a t t o r n e y . T h e r e f o r e ,
43a
Mr. B e l t o n d oes no t have any more a b i l i t y
as f a r as the t r i a l o f t h i s ty pe o f ca se
i s co n c e rn e d than
Mrs. A rthur . The q u e s t i o n i s what i s a
r e a s o n a b l e f e e and what amount o f t ime
was p r o p e r l y s p e n t .
The f i r s t item th a t ca u se s the c o u r t
some pause i s th a t Mr, B e l t o n c la im e d a
t o t a l o f 16 hours and 45 minutes f o r the
p r e p a r a t i o n , f i l i n g and argum ent o f a
m o t i o n f o r summary ju d g m e n t . On th e
f a c e , i t seems t h i s i s a T i t l e V II c a s e .
I t would be a most unique c a s e , one o f
w h i c h t h i s c o u r t i s u n a w a r e , when a
m o t i o n f o r summary ju d g m en t w o u ld be
p ro p e r in a T i t l e VII c a s e . Mrs. C o u l t e r
r e q u e s t e d a h e a r i n g which was g r a n t e d ,
and the m ot ion f o r summary judgment, i t s
p r e p a r a t i o n and argument and the h e a r in g
t h e r e o f was a m otion in f u t i l i t y . The
44a
c o u r t w i l l not a l l o w the f e e f o r t h o s e
s e r v i c e s t o b e c h a r g e d a g a i n s t t h e
d e fe n d a n t . Th is i s not a paper l a w s u i t .
T h e r e f o r e 16 hours and 45 minutes w i l l be
d e l e t e d from the t o t a l hours c la im e d .
In c o n n e c t i o n w ith the s t i p u l a t i o n
o f f a c t and p r e t r i a l c o n f e r e n c e ,
Mr. B e l t o n c l a i m e d 44 h o u r s a n d 10
m i n u t e s . Keep i n mind t h a t a g r e a t
number o f t h e s e hours must be d u e p l i c a t e s
[ s i c ] o f the hours c la im ed by A rthur , and
e v e n w i t h o u t th a t b e in g s o , t h i s i s an
i n o r d i n a t e amount o f t ime in c o n n e c t i o n
w i t h a s i m p l e l a w s u i t i n a m a t t e r i n
w h i c h B e l t o n i s an e x p e r t in the f i e l d
and a p r o f e s s o r h a n d l in g the s u b j e c t o f
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a t V a n d e r b i l t Law S c h o o l .
The c o u r t w i l l r ed u ce t h o s e hours by 22
hours and 5 m inutes .
45a
In c o n n e c t i o n w ith the d e p o s i t i o n s
taken , he c la im e d 20 hours and 5 m inutes ,
and the d e p o s i t i o n s were taken by A le t a
A rth u r . As s t a t e d b e f o r e , A l e t a Arthur
i s a p e r f e c t l y com petent t r i a l a t t o r n e y
and t h e r e was no need f o r Mr. B e l t o n t o
b e p r e s e n t a t t h e t a k i n g t h e r e o f .
However, the c o u r t w i l l a l l o w t h o s e hours
b eca u se Mrs. Arthur may have f e l t b e t t e r
w i th someone h o l d i n g her hand.
A n o t h e r i tem i s t r i a l p r e p a r a t i o n ,
18 h o u r s . M r s . A r t h u r h a d t r i a l
p r e p a r a t i o n . The c o u r t f e e l s t h a t 9
h o u r s i s s u f f i c i e n t t i m e f o r t r i a l
p r e p a r a t i o n i n a s i m p l e c a s e o f t h i s
n a t u r e . T h e r e f o r e , the c o u r t w i l l d e l e t e
9 h o u r s .
In c o n n e c t i o n w ith the a p p l i c a t i o n
f o r f e e , Mr . B e l t o n h a s l i s t e d
a p p r o x im a te ly 13 h o u rs . Three hours a re
46a
c l a i m e d f o r r e s e a r c h , d r a f t i n g and
p r e p a r a t i o n o f a f f i d a v i t s from Ashe and
R ob inson . Another 3 hours a re c la im e d in
c o n n e c t i o n w i th d r a f t i n g and a s k in g the
c o u r t t o take j u d i c i a l n o t i c e o f c e r t a i n
i t e m s , e t c . The c o u r t i s o f the o p i n i o n
t h a t t h i s i s u n r e a s o n a b le and t h e r e f o r e
re d u ce s t h i s amount t o 5 h o u r s .
The t o t a l number o f hours c la im ed i s
1 8 5 . 5 9 . The t o t a l n u m b er o f h o u r s
d e l e t e d i s 5 5 . 8 3 .
In a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e memorandum
f i l e d in the P erk in s c a s e , the c o u r t w i l l
a l l o w $85 p e r h o u r f o r t h e 4 . 2 5 hours
per form ed in 1982, the c o u r t f i n d i n g that
t h i s i s a r e a s o n a b l e c h a r g e f o r t h e
s e r v i c e s ren d ered a t that t im e. As f o r
the hours in 1983 and 1984, a f e e o f $110
p e r h o u r w i l l b e a l l o w e d , t h e c o u r t
f i n d i n g t h i s a r e a s o n a b le f e e per hour
47a
f o r th e s e r v i c e s ren d ered in a c c o r d a n c e
w i t h N o r t h c r o s s v . Board o f E d u c a t i o n ,
611 F .2 d 624 ( 6 t h C i r . 1 9 7 9 ) , c e r t .
d e n ie d 447 U.S. 911, 100 S. Ct . 1999, 64
L. Ed. 2d 862 ( 1 9 8 0 ) , and H e n s l e y v .
E ck e r h a r t , 76 L. Ed. 2d 40 ( 1 9 8 3 ) .
___________________ [si_______________
L. CLURE MORTON
SENIOR U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE
48a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
MARY LOUCILLE COULTER )
)
VS. ) NO. 3 -8 3 -0 6 6 8
)
STATE OF TENNESSEE; )
DEPT. OF TRANSPORTA- )
TION, ET AL. )
O R D E R
In a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e memorandum
c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s l y f i l e d , i t i s ORDERED
t h a t an a t t o r n e y f e e i n th e amount o f
FOURTEEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-SEVEN
AND 3 5 / 1 0 0 ( $ 1 4 , 1 6 7 . 3 5 ) DOLLARS b e
awarded t o R obert B e l t o n , Esq.
__________________ 13J___________________
L. CLURE MORTON
SENIOR U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE
49a
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
MARY LUCILLE COULTER, ]
3
P l a i n t i f f ]
3
v s . 3
3
3
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR- ]
TATION, e t a l . , 3
3
D e fe n d a n t s ]
AGREED MEMORANDUM
The p l a i n t i f f , Mary L u c i l l e C o u l t e r ,
a f e m a l e c i t i z e n o f the United S t a t e s ,
f i l e d t h i s a c t i o n f o r r e l i e f pursuant to
T i t l e V I I o f t h e C i v i l R i g h t s A c t o f
1964, as amended, 42 U. S. C. §§ 2000e e t
s e q . The p l a i n t i f f i s an employee o f the
Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f the S t a t e
o f Tennessee ( " T r a n s p o r t a t i o n " ) , and she
No. 3 - 8 3 -
0668
JUDGE L.
CLURE MORTON
50a
a l l e g e d th a t T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and the o t h e r
d e f e n d a n t s h a v e d i s c r i m i n a t e d and
c o n t i n u e d t o d i s c r i m i n a t e a g a i n s t h er
b e c a u s e o f h e r s e x i n r e j e c t i n g her
a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a p r o m o t i o n t o t h e
p o s i t i o n o f R e g io n a l O f f i c e Manager. The
p l a i n t i f f p r o c e e d e d under the d i s p a r a t e
t r e a t m e n t t h e o r y o f d i s c r i m i n a t i o n
e s t a b l i s h e d by the c o u r t s .
T h i s c a s e came on t o be h ea rd on
J u ly 2, 1984. The p l a i n t i f f i n t r o d u c e d
i n t o e v i d e n c e t h e S t i p u l a t i o n s o f Fact
e n t e r e d i n t o b e t w e e n t h e p a r t i e s and
r e s t e d her c a s e . The d e fen d a n t c a l l e d as
w i t n e s s e s James P h i l l i p D a v is , John Burke
and James Harper. At the c o n c l u s i o n o f
the p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the d e f e n d a n t s ' c a s e ,
t h e C o u r t r u l e d from the bench , on the
b a s i s o f the t e s t im o n y o f the w i t n e s s e s ,
s t a t e m e n t s o f c o u n s e l , and t h e e n t i r e
51a
r e c o r d in t h i s c a u s e , th a t the p l a i n t i f f
had c a r r i e d her burden o f p r o v in g by the
p r e p o n d e r a n c e o f t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t
d e fe n d a n t s had d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t the
p l a i n t i f f on t h e b a s i s o f her s e x , in
v i o l a t i o n o f T i t l e V I I o f t h e C i v i l
R ig h ts Act o f 1964, as amended, 42 U. S. C.
§§ 2000e, e t s e q . , by f a i l i n g t o promote
h e r t o t h e p o s i t i o n o f R e g io n a l O f f i c e
Manager w i t h i n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and th a t
s h e was e n t i t l e d t o a p p r o p r i a t e r e l i e f .
U n i t e d S t a t e s P o s t a l S e r v i c e s Board v .
m e n s , 103 S . C t . 1478, 75 L .E d .2d 403
( 1 9 8 3 ) ; T e x a s D ep a rtm en t o f Community
A f f a i r s v . B u r d i n e , 450 U. S . 248, 101
S . C t . 1 0 8 9 , 67 L . Ed . 2 d 207 ( 1 9 8 1 ) ;
McDonnell Douglas v . G reen , 411 U.S. 792,
93 S . Ct . 1817, 36 L .E d .2 d 668 ( 1 9 7 3 ) .
The p a r t i e s h a v e a g r e e d t o t h e
f o l l o w i n g r e l i e f t o be a c c o r d e d t o the
52a
p l a i n t i f f as the p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y in t h i s
c a s e :
1. T h e p l a i n t i f f s h a l l b e
promoted, as o f August 1, 1984,
t o t h e p o s i t i o n o f
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S e r v i c e s
A s s i s t a n t 3, the same p o s i t i o n
h e l d b y G i l f o r d Wa l k e r , and
s h a l l be p l a c e d a t t h e same
grade and pay l e v e l as G i l f o r d
W a l k e r . Due t o a s t a t e w i d e
r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , t h e t i t l e
" R e g i o n a l O f f i c e M anager" no
l o n g e r e x i s t s w i t h i n the S t a t e
p e r s o n n e l system .
2. The d e fe n d a n t s w i l l pay t o the
p l a i n t i f f as b a c k p a y , p l u s
i n t e r e s t , f r om J u l y 1, 1982
through August 1, 1984, the sum
o f One Thousand Three Hundred
53a
F i f t y One D o l l a r s and N in e ty
Four C e n t s ( $ 1 , 3 5 1 . 9 4 ) , t o be
p a i d t o t h e p l a i n t i f f o n
January 2, 1985.
3. The d e f e n d a n t s w i l l re im burse
the p l a i n t i f f f o r the f o l l o w i n g
e x p e n s e s :
F i l i n g f e e $ 60 . 00
D e p o s i t i o n
c o s t s 889. 25
X erox in g
ex pen ses 340. 85
Long d i s t a n c e
te le p h o n e 2 . 53
$ 1 , 2 9 2 . 6 3
4. The d e fe n d a n t s s h a l l c r e d i t the
p l a i n t i f f w i t h 3 1 . 8 h o u r s o f
c o m p t i m e f o r t i m e s p e n t
c o n s u l t i n g w i t h a t t o r n e y s , a t
d e p o s i t i o n s and i n c o u r t in
c o n n e c t i o n w ith her c a s e .
54a
5. The d e f e n d a n t s s h a l l pay t o
A l e t a G. Arthur her r e a s o n a b le
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e o f T h i r t e e n
Thousand S ix Hundred Twenty One
D o l l a r s and Twenty F iv e Cents
( $ 1 3 , 6 2 1 . 2 5 ) ,
The m atter o f r e a s o n a b le a t t o r n e y ' s
f e e s t o be p a i d t o p l a i n t i f f ' s o t h e r
c o u n s e l , Robert B e l t o n , i s r e s e r v e d f o r
l a t e r d e t e r m in a t i o n by the C ourt .
55a
An a p p r o p r i a t e o r d e r s h a l l be
e n t e r e d .
__________________ / s /
L. CLURE MORTON
APPROVED FOR ENTRY:
___________ j s j
ALETA G. ARTHUR
__________ / s /
ROBERT BELTON
__________ Zs L _________
MICHAEL L. PARSONS
56a
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
MARY LUCILLE COULTER ]
]
P l a i n t i f f ]
3
v s . ]
3
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ]
3
DEPARTMENT OF TRANS- ]
PORTATION, e t a l . ]
3
D efen dants ]
ORDER
In a c c o r d a n c e w ith th e Agreed
Memorandum, judgement i s hereby e n te re d
f o r the p l a i n t i f f , Mary L u c i l l e C o u l t e r ,
and i t i s h e r e b y ORDERED t h a t s h e be
g ra n ted the r e l i e f s e t out t h e r e in .
No. 3 -8 3 -0 6 6 8
JUDGE L. CLURE
MORTON
ZsZ
L. CLURE MORTON