29 Fair empl.prac.cas. 300, 29 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,937 National Organization for Women v. Bank of California, National Association

This appeal arises out of district court administration of a consent decree in a Title VII suit. Plaintiffs National Organization for Women, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, American G. I. Forum (“the organizational plaintiffs”), and several named individuals filed this class action in 1972. They alleged that defendant Bank of California (“the Bank”) unlawfully discriminated against Blacks, women, and Spanish-surnamed persons. The parties entered into a consent decree in 1973. The decree defines the Spanish-Sur-named class it protects as “persons with Spanish surnames and others, those with Spanish-American background, including Mexican Americans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans and those from Central and South America. This category does not include those of Portuguese ancestry.”

The decree was administered without dispute until September, 1977, when plaintiffs moved to require the Bank to show cause why it should not be held in contempt. Within the next year, plaintiffs filed a retaliation claim on behalf of two Bank employees, a motion to modify the consent decree, and a motion for an audit of the Bank’s performance in hiring Spanish-sur-named persons under…

dissenting.

I believe that the district court abused its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees and costs to the defendants. Attorney’s fees were awarded for the plaintiff’s October 12 motion (and for that part of the motion for fees attributable to the October 12 motion). The district court found that this motion met the Christiansburg standard of “frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.” Costs were awarded for the October 12 motion as well as for an unsuccessful retaliation claim pursued by the plaintiffs. Attorney Fees ■

The parties agreed to a partial audit of Spanish-surnamed employees. The auditor investigated a random sample of the persons listed by the company as Spanish-sur-named. He found the listings substantially inaccurate because forty-five percent of these people had origins in peninsular Spain. The auditor reasoned that these people were not disadvantaged and so were not the true focus of the consent decree.

On the basis of the auditor’s finding, the plaintiffs moved for a complete audit of all persons listed as Spanish-surnamed. They argued that the court should accept the auditor’s premise that people with origins in peninsular Spain were not the…

680 F.2d 1291 29 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 300 , 29 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,937 NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BANK OF CALIFORNIA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 81-4299. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 12, 1982. Decided July 8, 1982. Robert L. Gnaizda, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants. Dennis H. Vaughn, Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, Santa Monica, Cal., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Before BROWNING, Chief Judge, SWYGERT * and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: 1 This appeal arises out of district court administration of a consent decree in a Title VII suit. Plaintiffs National Organization for Women, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, American G. I. Forum ("the organizational plaintiffs"), and several named individuals filed this class action in 1972. They alleged that defendant Bank of California ("the Bank") unlawfully discriminated against Blacks, women, and Spanish-surnamed persons. The parties entered into a consent decree in 1973. The decree defines the…