United States Ninth Circuit

A civil rights plaintiff, based solely on its status as a prevailing party in an original action, may be eligible to recover attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. section 1988 for defending its consent decree from a collateral attack brought by a third party in a subsequent action; here, however, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying attorney fees.

Appellate Information

• Argued 12/06/2001
• Decided 04/01/2002
• Published 04/01/2002

Judges

• D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judge:, Before HUG, D.W. NELSON and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Thomas I. Atkins, Brooklyn, NY, for the plaintiffs-appellants., James L. Hunt, Carter M. Stewart, McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen LLP, San Francisco, CA, for the plaintiffs-appellants., Peter Graham Cohn, Petaluma, CA, for the plaintiffs-appellants., Eve Jefferson Patterson, Michael Harris, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, San Francisco, CA, for the plaintiffs-appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Louise H. Renne, David Campos, San Francisco City Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for defendants-appellees San Francisco Unified School District, Board of Education, and Superintendent of the San Francisco Unified School District., Robin B. Johansen, Thomas A. Willis, Remcho, Johansen & Purcell, San Leandro, CA, for defendant-appellee State Superintendent of Public Instruction., David C. Girard, Anthony K. Lee, Girard & Green LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Ho intervenors-appellees.