Motion to Amend Judgment; Authorities in Support of Motion

     [||83fa9ecc-c1c1-48f8-843d-31a862d76cc8||] % 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. 

un 10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 10018 ¢ (212) 586-8397 

  

January 6, 1978 

Honorable Norman L. Gillespie 
Clerk 
United States District Court 
Northern District of Mississippi 
P.O. Box 727 
Oxford, Mississippi 38655 

Re: Norwood v. Harrison 

No. WC 70-53-K 
  

Dear Mr. Gillespie: 

Enclosed please find for filing a Motion 
to Amend Judgment and certificate of service. 

I have sent counsel opposite and Judge 
Keady a copy of the Motion and a Memorandum in 

   

Support. 

Sincerely, 

\r~ \ 

\ 
yn R. Leventhal 

MRL; ja 
Encis. 

cc: Honorable William C. Keady 
Peter Stockett, Esq. 

Contributions are deductible for U.S. income tax purposes 

 



  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI 

WESTERN DIVISION 

  

DELORES NORWOOD, et al., LL
] 

Plaintiffs, : 

Vv. NO. WC 70-53«K 

D.L. HARRISON, Sr., er al. : 

Defendants. : 

  

MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT 
  

Plaintiffs, pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure, respectfully move the Court for an 

order amending its judgment of January 3, 1978 in the follow- 

ing respects: 

1. The Court's opinion of March 2, 1976 and Judgment of 

January 3, 1978, award fees at rates of $20., $30., $35. and 

$50. an hour. 410 ?.8upp. at 142, n, 10, Plaintiffs respect- 

fully request that the award be increased as follows: 

  Leventhal 

116.35 xx $40, " $4,654. 

101.50 22 $60. - $6,090. 

152. X 370. 10, 640. 

141.50 x $80. - 11,320. 

115. 2.100. - yiLi500. $44,204 

Nabrit 

35 2 $100, - $3,500, $ 3,500 
  

$47,704. 
  
  

2. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the award be 

increased to reflect time expended by plaintiffs' counsel, 

 



  

subsequent to the filing of their August,1974 affidavits, as follows: 

  
  

  

Hours 
Date Work Performed by MRL Expended 

October 4 - 11,1974 Memorandum in Support of Counsel Fees 16 
& Letter to the Court. 

February 20,1975- Telephone conferenceswith Ellis : 5.5 
March 33,1975 Griffith, Esq. & drafting of Stipula- 

tion for Presbyterian Day School of 
Cleveland. 

May 28,29,1975 Letter to Judge Keady (2 pages) 1.58 

October 1-3, 1975 Memorandum in Response to the Court's 8.0 
Letter Inquiry. 

[March 2,1976 Court's Opithion] ee 

April 26, 1976 Letter designating Record on Appeal & «75 
Review of Defendants' Designation. 

May 19, 1976 Letter to Counsel Opposite «3 

August 13,1976 Letter to Counsel Opposite Her L 

August 6-13, 1976 Drafting, Rewriting, Motion for Summary 
Affirmance and Brief for Plaintiffs- 
Appellees. S«5 

October 5-6, 1976 Appellees' Reply on Summary Affirmance 4.5 
& Motion to Supplement Record. 

October 21,1976 Letter to Court of Appeals "ao 

October 28, 1976 Telephone call from and letter in 
response to Court of Appeals. Ro 

November 1, 1976 Letter to Court of Appeals. «25 

November 10-11,1976 Letter response to Defendants’ 4, 
Supplemental Brief. 

November 30,1976 Brief response to Defendants’ 4.5 
Supplemental Brief. 

October 10-17,1977 Preparation for Oral Argument & Oral 4. 
Argument. 

October 16;18,1977 Travel to and from Oral Argument 6. 
(In Jackson, Mississippi) 

November 23-24,1977 Review of Fifth Circuit decision, ; 3.5 
research on alternatives. 

January 5-6, 1978 Motion to Amend Judgment & Memorandum 6. 
in Support. 

Total: 74.25 

Supplemental Award Requested: 

74.25 x $100 = $7,425. 

 



  

3. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the award 

of costs be increased to reflect: 

(a) costs awarded by the Court of Appeals 
: and included in the mandate .....e... $120.00 

(b) expenses incurred by plaintiffs’ 
counsel travelling to and from 
Jackson, Mississippi for oral 
BIgUNENt weve onsen Covidien vo ve 5290.19 

Total + $410.10 

Respectfully submitted, 

ACK GREENBERG 
MELVYN R. LEVENTHAL 

10 Columbus Circle 
Suite 2030 
New York, N.Y.10019 

  

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Sworn and subscribed to in 

New York, New York before me 
ey 

this £& day of January, 1978. 

J 

nTime Ey 
Notary Public 
  

[YALINA RD. PASSE 
Notary Public, State of Mew York 

ign, 41.4F2552¢8 

Qualified in Queens County 
Commission Expires March 30, 1978 

 



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

The undersigned certifies that copies of the 

foregoing Motion to Amend Judgment was served on counsel 

for Defendants by United States mail, postage prepaid, 

this 6th day of January, 1978, as follows: 

Peter M. Stockett, Esdg. 
Assistant Attorney General 
Department of Justice 
Office of the Attorney General 
Jackson, Mississippi 39205 

i 

( \ { { \ 
— \ 

~    
  MELVYN R. LEVENTHAL 

 



  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI 

WESTERN DIVISION 

  

DELORES NORWOOD, et al., w
h
 

Plaintiffs, 

Vv. : : No. WC 70-53-K 

D.L. HARRISON, SR., et al. : 

Defendants. 

  

AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF 
MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT 
  

1. Plaintiffs' request for doubling the original fee 

award is supported by these authorities: 

(a) The Senate Committee Report on the Civil 

Rights Attorney's Fees Act of 1976 states that civil rights 

lawyers should recover fees comparable to those obtained by 

anti-trust lawyers. Legislative History, p.l2. The 

Committee Report cites as exemplary several cases, decided 

prior to this Court's Norwood opinion, as awarding "reasonable 

fees; " in all such cases the court awarded substantially more 

than was awarded in the instant case. Stanford Daily v. 
  

2urcher, 64 P.R.D. 680 (N.D. Cal. 1974) (350, an hour for 

all time expended); Davis v. County of Los Angeles, 8 EPD 
  

9444 (C.D. Cal. 1974) [or 8 FEP 245] $60. an hour awarded to 

lead attorney): Swann Vv. Charlotte Mecklenburg Board of 
  

Education, 66 F.R.D. 483 (W.D. N.C. 1975) (approximately $60. 
  

an hour). 

(b) The legislative history of the 1976 statute 

also adopts the principle that since fees can only be recovered 

by plaintiffs if they prevail, a "bonus" or "multiplier" ought 

to be included when they prevail; that is, it cites with 

 



  

approval civil rights cases which consider the contingent 

nature of the award in assessing a reasonable fee. Stanford 
  

Daily, 64 F.R.D. at 685-86; Swann, supra. The legislative 
  

history of the 1976 statute also cites with approval Johnson 

  

Vv. Georgia Highway Express, 488 F.24 714, 718 (5th Cir. 1974) 

which requires the Court to consider the contingent nature of 

the fee award in arriving at a reasonable fee. 

(c) The Fifth Circuit has recently held that $65. and 

$75. an hour are reasonable rates for a routine civil rights 

case. Brown v, Culpepper, 559. v.24 274, 276, n.4, 278 (5th 
  

Cir. 1977), rehearing denied with opinion, 561 F.24 1177 

{5th Cir, 1977). 

2. The Court is required to award fees for time expended 

in successfully defending the last appeal. A critical objective 

of the 1976 statute - "to assure that attorneys will undertake 

representation in this type of case" - would be undermined if 

time spent defending or seeking a fee award was not compensated. 

Bolton v, Murray Envelope Corp., 553 F.24 881, 884 (5th Cir. 
  

1977). The Fifth Circuit has very recently at least twice 

required district courts to award fees for time expended on 

appeal. Hodge v, Seller, 558 7.24 284, 287 (5th Cir. 1977): 
  

Gora Vv. Turner, 563 P.24 159, 163 (5th Cir. 1977). 
  

3. Expenses of counsel necessary for the defense or 

achievement of an award are to be compensated to assure counsel 

that he will not experience a loss in defending civil rights 

cases. The legislative history of the 1976 statute cites with 

approval two cases which award expenses of the litigation 

separately from attorneys' fees. Swann, supra, 66 F.R.D. 
  

at 486; Davis v. County of Los Angeles, 8 EPD 5048. "The 
  

Court is not unaware of the strong policies which lie behind 

remedial civil rights legislation and the need to ensure that 

 



  

those who defend their rights are not financially penalized. 

Hodge v. Seiler, supra, 558 F.2d at 287. 
  

Dey submitted, 

A) = = 4 
JACK FER 

MELVYN R. LEVENTHAL 

10 Columbus Circle 

Suite 2030 
New York, N.Y.10019 

  

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

The undersigned certifies that copies of the foregoing 

Authorities in Support of Motion to Amend Judgment was served 

on counsel for Defendants by United States mail, postage pre- 

paid, this 6th day of January, 1978, as follows: 

Peter M. Stockett, Esq. 
Assistant Attorney General 
Department of Justice 
Office of the Attorney General 
Jackson, Mississippi 39205 

  

  

MELVYN R. LEVENTHAL 
| 

- 3 [||83fa9ecc-c1c1-48f8-843d-31a862d76cc8||]