Prevailing Party

News & Analysis as of

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

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

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects The Government’s Position In The Largest EEOC Fee Sanction Case Ever

Seyfarth Synopsis: In a landmark case for EEOC litigation involving fee sanctions, while employer CRST successfully argued that a ruling “on-the-merits” is not necessary to be a prevailing party, the SCOTUS remanded the case...more

SCOTUS Dodges EEOC Fee-Shifting

This morning, the Supreme Court dodged the final resolution of an issue we have all been dying to have resolved, but threw a nice bone to employers in the process. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC The case started when the...more

The Supreme Court - May 2016 #3

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in three cases on May 19, 2016: CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 14-1375: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought a suit in its own name...more

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

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

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

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

An Open Love Letter to Justice Clarence Thomas

I admit it. I have a crush on Justice Thomas. Today’s unanimous Supreme Court opinion in CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC – holding that a merit-based dismissal is not necessary for a defendant to qualify as the “prevailing...more

Supreme Court Decides RST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC

On May 19, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided RST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 14-1375, holding that a defendant may be a prevailing party—and therefore entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees under...more

Recovering Attorney's Fees for Breach of Contract Under Texas Law Recent Cases Say No!

In the energy sector, many contracts contain Texas choice of law provisions, or are performed in Texas, which means that Texas law probably applies. The conventional wisdom in Texas is that a prevailing party can recover its...more

California Employment Law Notes - May 2016

Employee Who Needed To Assist Disabled Son Could Proceed With "Associational Disability Discrimination" Claim - Castro-Ramirez v. Dependable Highway Express, Inc., 246 Cal. App. 4th 180 (2016) - Luis...more

District Court Declines to Grant Voluntary Dismissal of Action with Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Pending Where Patent Was...

After a district court in the Eastern District of Virginia invalidated the patent-in-suit because it did "not pass the two part test laid out by the Supreme Court in Mayo and Alice." Peschke Map Techs. LLC v. Rouse Properties...more

Court Cannot Divide An Offer To Settle

In Sugar Hut Group Ltd & ors v A J Insurance Service [2016] EWCA Civ 46, 3 February 2016, the Court of Appeal over-ruled the High Court’s judgment about how costs should be awarded where a claimant succeeds on only part of...more

Intellectual Property Law - April 2016

The Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument Regarding the Standard for Awarding Enhanced Damages in Patent Cases - Why it matters: The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing the standard for awarding "enhanced" damages in patent...more

Appellate Court Notes

Supreme Court Advance Release Opinions: SC19384 - State v. Carter - SC19282 - State v. Peeler - Appellate Court Advance Release Opinions: AC37262 - Dumbauld v. Dumbauld - AC37262 Concurrence -...more

Settle and Pay? The California Supreme Court Says, “Yes.”

A plaintiff who voluntarily dismisses a lawsuit after entering into a monetary settlement may be a “prevailing party” entitled to costs and fees under California law. deSaulles v. Community Hospital of the Monterey...more

Context Is Everything: Evaluating Different Approaches Toward Attorneys’ Fees Awards Under Copyright Act in Light of Supreme Court...

The Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments on standards for awarding attorneys’ fees to the winner of a copyright dispute. Currently there are at least three different test being applied by federal courts. Data analysis...more

Settlement Agreements That are Silent Concerning Allocation of Costs Can Result in Costs Awarded to Plaintiff

Maureen DeSaulles v. Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula - Supreme Court (March 10, 2016) - In an action for alleged disability discrimination and related claims, the Supreme Court had to determine...more

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument In EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc.

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. Involving the largest fee sanction award ever levied against the EEOC – nearly $4.7 million – EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc....more

Quick Hits: Persuader Rules, Class Action Lawsuits, Prevailing Party, E-mail Phishing

With Opening Day of baseball season nearly upon us, it’s time again to bring back a “Quick Hits” segment to recap a few noteworthy (but not completely post-worthy) employment law items you might have missed recently....more

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

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

Prevailing Party Costs Under CCP Section 1032

The California Supreme Court recently held that a plaintiff who obtains a monetary settlement and dismisses the action is the prevailing party entitled to statutory costs under Code of Civil Procedure section 1032. DeSaulles...more

Plaintiff May Recover Statutory Costs After a Voluntary Dismissal

In deSaulles v. Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula (H038184, Superior Court No. M85528), the Sixth Appellate District held a plaintiff is entitled to statutory costs as the prevailing party where a voluntary...more

Do You Think You can Recover The $1100 Fee For Designating A Case To Business Court As A "Cost"? Maybe You Can't.

Recovering the $1,000+ fee for designating a case to the Business Court seems like the unattainable Holy Grail for successful parties in the Court. That's so even though the NC General Assembly amended the statute listing...more

Court Awards Costs But Not Attorneys’ Fees

Andrews, J. Defendant’s motion for costs and fees is granted as to costs and denied as to fees. Plaintiff filed an unopposed motion to dismiss after defendant’s suppliers had settled with plaintiff. Defendant moved for...more

On Appeal, No Fee Shifting Credit for LevelUp

In a recent patent appeal involving a Boston-based mobile payment startup, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit signaled its reluctance to disturb district courts’ discretion in fee shifting decisions. The Federal...more

86 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×