Donald H. Wakefield and Barry J. Smith v. Harold E. Mathews

Good Law
852 F.2d 482·1988 WL 74556·47 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 38,192·47 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 552·1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 9912
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 22, 198887-2212California1,202 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schroeder, J.

The underlying action was a suit by employees of a school district claiming employment discrimination on the basis of age and race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . The parties settled the underlying claims and executed a written settlement agreement. The plaintiffs then applied for attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 , which authorizes attorneys’ fees to prevailing parties in civil rights cases. The district court denied the application, holding that the plaintiffs had waived the right to attorneys’ fees in the settlement agreement. Plaintiffs appeal from the order denying fees. In the six page settlement agreement, the defendant agreed to pay $33,000.00 to plaintiff Wakefield and $5,000.00 to plaintiff Smith. The agreement provided a detailed release by the plaintiffs in which they released defendants from:

The agreement itself did not contain the phrase “attorneys’ fees.” However, when plaintiffs applied for attorneys’ fees following settlement, defendants contended that the parties discussed the matter of fees during settlement negotiations and that the agreement was intended to release defendants from liability for attorneys’ fees.

The fees question was heard by…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.