Nancy FADHL, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Defendant-Appellant

ORDER

The memorandum disposition filed July 26, 1988, is redesignated as a per curiam opinion.

OPINION

This court affirmed the district court’s judgment against the City and County of San Francisco for damages and affirmed the base award of attorney’s fees computed at an ordinary hourly rate for hours expended without any enhancement. Fadhl v. City and County of San Francisco, 804 F.2d 1097 (9th Cir.1986). Pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air (Delaware Valley II), — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 3078 , 97 L.Ed.2d 585 (1987), we retained jurisdiction over the question of whether the district court properly applied a multiplier to the lodestar fee. Fadhl, 804 F.2d at 1099 . We now affirm.

In Delaware Valley II, a majority of the Court held that enhancing a fee award for contingency is permissible if two prerequisites identified in Justice O’Con-nor’s concurrence are met. First, the fee applicant must establish that “without an adjustment for risk the prevailing party ‘would have faced substantial difficulties in finding counsel in the local or other relevant market.’ ” Id. 107 S.Ct. at 3091 (O’Connor, J., concurring).…