OLLICE DAVIS, SR., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
THOMAS J. MILLS, ETC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the district court's failure to make specific findings required by Christiansburg necessitates vacating the award of attorney's fees.
A prevailing defendant in a civil rights case was awarded attorney's fees and costs by the district court without specific findings. The plaintiff app…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 42 U.S.C. § 1988 Construction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from an award of attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 to a prevailing defendant in a civil rights case. Without making specific findings, the district court granted $10,000 attorney’s fees plus $564.80 in costs to the defendant school board. The plaintiff now appeals.
Christiansburg Garment Co. v. E.E.O.C., 434 U.S. 412, 98 S.Ct. 694, 54 L.Ed.2d 648 (1978), provides:
[A] plaintiff should not be assessed his opponent’s attorney’s fees unless a court finds that his claim was frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless, or that the plaintiff continued to litigate after it clearly became so.
The trial court’s failure to make the specific findings required by the Christiansburg rule for award of attorney’s fees to a prevailing defendant necessitates our vacation of its award. The case will be REMANDED to the district court for further proceedings including a hearing. We express no opinion as to whether fees should or should not be awarded to this defendant.
VACATED and REMANDED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Birr v. Shillinger, 894 F.2d 1160 (10th Cir. 1990)…is, 886 F. 2d 777, 780 (6th Cir.1989) (federal court bound by Tennessee Supreme Court decision that the Tennessee legislature intended cumulative punishment for [*1162] aggravated assault and firing into an occupied dwelling); Deloach v. Wainwright, 777 F. 2d 1524, 1525-26 (11th Cir.l985)(fed-eral court bound by Florida Supreme Court finding that the Florida legislature intended multiple punishments for felony murder and the underlying felony). Here, a majority of the Wyoming Supreme Court, in affirming pet…
-
McCune v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (M.D. Fla. 2024)…nriquez held that because the two offenses were “separate and distinct, the intent of the legislature clearly [was] to provide for separate convictions and punishments.” Id. at 415-16. That determination binds this Court. See Deloach v. Wainwright, 777 F.2d 1524, 1525 (11th Cir. 1985) (noting that, for double-jeopardy purposes, federal courts are "bound by the Supreme Court of Florida's interpretation of its legislative enactments"). And because the Court is bound to accept that the two offenses do not cont…
-
Elder v. Dixon (N.D. Fla. 2024)…legislative authorization by imposing multiple punishments for the same offense."). In analyzing what the Florida legislature intended, a federal habeas court is bound to accept the Florida courts' construction of Florida law. Deloach v. Wainwright, 777 F.2d 1524, 1525–26 (11th Cir. 1985) (affirming denial of § 2254 petition and explaining that a federal court is "bound by the Supreme Court of Florida's interpretation of its legislative enactments" and determination that the Florida Legislature intended mul…
Authorities Cited
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, 434 U.S. 412 (U.S. 1978)