News & Analysis as of

Prevailing Party Frivolous Lawsuits

Fuerst Ittleman David & Joseph

Florida Litigation Procedure Update: Third DCA Clarifies Key Aspects of § 57.105

In AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Rigney, 3D21-2261 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 6, 2023), Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal reviewed the denial of two motions for sanctions under section 57.105, Florida Statutes. In its ruling, the...more

Warner Norcross + Judd

When is a Court Filing Considered “Frivolous,” Allowing for Court Sanctions?

Warner Norcross + Judd on

In the recent case of In re Conservatorship of DPV, Docket No 362139 (Mich Ct App July 27, 2023), the court explores when a court — here the probate court — can sanction a party for a “frivolous” filing....more

Dentons

Lessons for Employers from Extended Litigation

Dentons on

Lawyers love to follow the intricacies of litigation - we read the court decisions and follow matters through trials like some follow the latest happenings in their favorite TV drama. CRST Van Expedited v. EEOC - From...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

End of the Road: Eighth Circuit Upholds $3.3 Million Fee Award Against The EEOC For Frivolous Claims

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: After over a decade of litigation between the EEOC and trucking company CRST Van Expedited, the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a federal district court’s order requiring the EEOC to pay $3.3 million in...more

Carlton Fields

Preserving Premature Rulings

Carlton Fields on

The jury was still deliberating over the personal injury case in Showan v. Pressdee, No. 1:16-cv-00468-ODE (N.D. Ga.), when the senior U.S. district judge decided to “get the ball rolling” on an expected motion for damages...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: December 2017

Payne & Fears on

Lopez v. Routt, 17 Cal. App. 5th 1006, 225 Cal. Rptr. 3d 851 (2017) - Facts: Plaintiff sued her employer and supervisor for harassment in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). The matter...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

EEOC Ordered To Pay $1.9 Million For Frivolous Claims Against Trucking Company

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: In the latest chapter of the ongoing legal battle between the EEOC and delivery company CRST Van Expedited regarding the agency’s sexual harassment claims, a federal district court ordered the EEOC to pay...more

Franczek P.C.

Supreme Court Tells EEOC It May Be on the Hook for Fees if It Does Not Fulfill Its Statutory Pre-Suit Duties

Franczek P.C. on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) authorizes the award of attorneys’ fees to a party who prevails in a discrimination or retaliation claim brought under that statute. Although this fee shifting provision...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Fee Wars: Supreme Court Eases Defendants’ Burden for Attorneys’ Fees in Baseless Discrimination Actions

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

In an 8-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that attorneys’ fees for successfully defending a Title VII action can be recovered by an employer even if the defendant’s victory is not based on the merits of the case....more

Fisher Phillips

Supreme Court Leaves Massive Attorney's Fee Award Against EEOC Unresolved

Fisher Phillips on

But Decision Could Still Be Helpful For Employers - Today, in a unanimous 8-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to issue a definitive ruling on whether an employer is entitled to recover nearly $5 million dollars...more

Littler

Supreme Court Holds a Party May be Entitled to Attorneys' Fees Absent a Favorable Ruling on the Merits

Littler on

On May 19, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in CRST, Inc. v. EEOC, which addressed the definition of a “prevailing party” who may be awarded attorneys’ fees in Title VII cases. Although the Court ultimately...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Truckin’ To The Top Court: CRST Files Final Reply Brief Before Supreme Court Argument Against EEOC

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In high-stakes litigation brought by the EEOC against trucking company CRST Van Expedited, Inc., (“CRST”), CRST recently submitted its final reply brief before the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral argument in the case later this...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Next Copyright “Fantasy” is Headed to The Supreme Court

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The last time the U.S. Supreme Court tackled the issue of attorneys’ fees under the Copyright Act was in Fogerty v. Fantasy. In that case, John Fogerty was sued for alleged copyright infringement over his song “The Old Man...more

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

Contractual Provisions Can Aid in the Recovery of Attorney’s Fees, But Consider the Unintended Consequences

Although the “American Rule” provides that each side pay its own attorneys’ fees, if your dispute arises from a contractual relationship, a “prevailing party” provision or indemnification clause may obligate one of the...more

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

When All Else Fails, Look to Fee-Shifting Statutes to Recover Attorney’s Fees

Your company is considering a lawsuit. Or maybe you’ve just been served with a summons and complaint. You’ve evaluated the strengths and weaknesses of the claims, and you’re confident that, when the case ends, you’ll be the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Makes It Harder For Prevailing FEHA Defendants To Recover Their Costs

Under section 1032(b) of the California Code of Civil Procedure, “a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding” unless some statute expressly says otherwise. It has been...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

A Judgment Cannot Not Lie Against Attorney Who is a Non Party

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP on

In Suarez v. City of Corona, 2014 DJDAR 12101, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District decided an interesting case concerning the interpretation of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1038....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

United States Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Two Cases That Could Potentially Deter Non-Practicing Entities From Filing Frivolous...

On October 1, 2013, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the “exceptional” case standard for awarding attorneys’ fees in two separate patent-infringement cases. Both cases relate to patentees who are...more

18 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide