Although She Was Unsuccessful On Some Claims, The Work Was Interrelated Such That Neither Allocation Nor A Further Reduction Was Required.
In Gonzalez v. County of Fresno, Case No. F086776 (5th Dist. Apr. 16, 2025) (unpublished), plaintiff recovered on a Bane Act claim (which has a fee-shifting statute), even though she failed to recover on some theories and two other plaintiffs were unsuccessful on the civil rights claims. The jury awarded her $500,000 against three defendants. She then moved for attorney’s fees of a little over $1.659 million inclusive of a 2.0 multiplier. The lower court awarded her $829,702.50,
Defendants’ challenges on appeal—that her work in related federal litigation and her partial lack of success required a further reduction—were rejected by the appellate court. Under the abuse of discretion standard, the federal work was related to the state court work, and plaintiff’s work on unsuccessful claims was related to work on successful ones, with no apportionment being required. The Fifth District panel also rebuffed the defense suggestion that the lack of success by other plaintiffs should be used for purposes of gauging her success.
Comments