Plaintiff Sought To Recover $358,383 In Fees; Limited Success Was Key Reason For Denial.
In Pierce v. City of Philadelphia, Civil Action No. 17-5539 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 2, 2019), a Native American plaintiff brought various civil rights, constitutional, Title VII, and state-related claims against City of Philadelphia for discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and hostile work environment. Plaintiff withdrew some claims, and City obtained summary judgment on some claims relating to a 2017 failure-to-promote theory. The case proceeded to trial on certain claims, with City beating discrimination claims but awarding plaintiff one dollar in nominal damages under a Title VII retaliation claim. Plaintiff then moved to recover $358,383 in attorney’s fees and $29,436.56 in costs as the prevailing party on the retaliation claim.
District Judge Gerald J. Pappert of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the attorney’s fees request altogether and remanded for the clerk to review a request for routine costs by plaintiff.
The main reason for the fee denial was the limited success obtained by plaintiff in the overall scheme of things, even though it is not per se dispositive. (Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 112, 117 (1992); see also Carroll v. Clifford Twp., 2014 WL 2860994 at *3 (M.D. Pa. June 23, 2014), aff’d, 625 F. App’x 43, 36 (3d Cir. 2015).) However, the circumstances showed that the limited success was crucial in this case, with no subsidiary factors cutting the other way.
Comments