Desegregation Foot-Draggers May Be Socked with Retroactive Counsel Fees Upon Losing School Cases

    PS 

i i) lA, | oo 

FYCSS NEICASE | £ at 
>| Ss 

sani 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

June 11, 1973 

High Bench Promises To Rule 

DESEGREGATION FOOT-DRAGGERS MAY BE 
SOCKED WITH RETROACTIVE COUNSEL 

FEES UPON LOSING SCHOOL CASES 

The Supreme Court agreed this morning to decide whether 

civil rights attorneys who win school desegregation cases 

are entitled to be paid eonnissi rade by their opponents in 

cases arising prior to the passage of the 1972 Emergency School 

Aid Act. 

The case, which involves $56,000 in counsel fees and court 

costs claimed by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, is a stepchild 

cf two of the Court's most important cases this term. 

Bradley v. Richmond School Board, on which the Court 

granted certiorari this morning, is the namesake of the 4-4 

decision rendered by the Court on May 21, 1973. 

In Richmond I, the Court decided that desegregation of 

the Richmond schools along metropolitan lines was improper. 

Because of that ruling, the Fund is seeking counsel fees for 

enly that portion of the case which down through the years it 

has consistently won: the desegregation of the Richmond city 

schools themselves. 

The case builds also on Northcross v. Memphis Board of 

Education, decided one week ago today by the Supreme Court 

(See LDF press release of 6/4/73: "Sock Desegregation Foot- 

Draggers for Counsel Fees..." SS ieee 

counsel fees to winners of school desegregation suits after 

- more - 

NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. | 10 Columbus Circle | New York, N.Y. 10019 | (212) 586-8397 

Jr, > President Jack Greenberg - D 

~<a 



July 1, 1972, the effective date of the Emergency School 

Aid Act. 

Bradley v. Richmond School Board, an attempt to de- 

segregate the public schools of Richmond, was commenced in 

1961. 

The Legal Defense Fund argues that counsel fees should 

be made available for some or all of the actions in the case 

prior to July l, 1972. 

"Until very recently the law of counsel fees has been 

negative," Jack Greenberg, Director-Counsel of the LDF, said 

this morning. 

"As a matter of ‘federal common law,' counsel fees have 

generally been awarded only when the school board has acted 

outrageously. 

"Since courts have been reluctant to characterize even 

the most obstructive or obstreperous. behavior as ‘'outrageous,' 

the cases almost never resulted in awards of counsel fees." 

A change in court attitudes began with the passage of 

the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968, Titles II, VII and 

VIII of which have allowed for counsel fees in public accommo- 

dations and fair employment cases. 

The rationale has been simple. Private citizens bring- 

ing suit to compel public agencies and others to obey the law 

are acting in a public capacity and should be so reimbursed. 

Their role has been characterized as that of "private attor- 

neys-general." 

"We believe the behavior of the Richmond School Board in 

this case has been clearly '‘outrageous,'" Greenberg said, 

noting thattwelve years after commencement of the suit, 

attorneys for the indigent plaintiffs were still awaiting 

- more — 



payment for their efforts to integrate the Richmond city 

schools. | | 

"Moreover," he added, "we don't believe those who are | 

trying to assert their rights under law should be forced 

to pay to make others obey it." 

Approximately $200,000 of the LDF's income in 1971 

and $125,000 in 1972 derived from court-awarded costs and 

attorneys' fees,according to LDF Controller Glavencel Toanes. 

The Fund also obtains income in counsel fees as part of Aree e 

tlements that do not reach the final stages of litigation. 

LDF litigation expenses run to $3,500,000 annually. 

: A major award such as the $56,000 sought here has a 

whipsaw effect on LDF attempts to raise funds, Greenberg 

said, noting that similar problems faced other public 

interest groups that are funded mainly by private contri- 

butions. 

Although the income is helpful, he said, it has a 

potentially adverse effect on contributions, Regular con- 

tributors reading of large awards sometimes assume that 

the Fund does not need their aid. 

“Our big recoveries are elie episodic," he added. A 

six-figure award such as that Gpteined by LDF two years ago 

against a major tobacco company as part of a back-pay decree 

for black employees victimized by discrimination helps en- 

courage long-term aiaeriqinatens to settle rather than fight. 

The LDF split that $200,000 fee with the North Carolina 

firm of Julius Chambers, local "cooperating attorneys" who 

had devoted an equal amount of time to the litigation. 

= more - 



"Our contributors know that our need for money is 

continuous if our work is to go forward," Greenberg Bait. 

- 30 - 

For further information contact: Frederick Koyle 
Acting Director 

Office of Public Informatidgn 
NAACP Legal Defense Fund 
10 Columbus Circle 
New York, N.Y. 10019 
[212] 586-8397 x 303 \