Maria Barrios v. Diamond Contract Services, Inc

Good Law
461 F. App'x 571
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 13, 201109-55603California656 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Maria Barrios was a prevailing plaintiff in an action brought under Title VII and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. Barrios appeals the denial of statutory attorney’s fees and partial denial of costs. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse and remand to a new district court judge for a proper fee calculation.

“We review the award or denial of attorney’s fees for abuse of discretion....” Coal, for Clean Air v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 971 F.2d 219, 229 (9th Cir.1992). “We will reverse if the district court misperceives or misapplies the law governing fee awards.” Id.

1. In Title VII cases, a prevailing plaintiff “ordinarily is to be awarded attorney’s fees in all but special circumstances.” Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC, 434 U.S. 412, 417 , 98 S.Ct. 694 , 54 L.Ed.2d 648 (1978). The district court abused its discretion when it determined that special circumstances justified a complete denial of attorney’s fees. The contingency fee agreement between Barrios and her counsel was not a special circumstance. Attor ney’s fees under Title VII belong to the party, and Title VU’s fee-shifting provision does not “regulate what…

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.