U.S. Supreme Court rules on Georgia case
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld that courts can award additional attorneys’ fees in civil rights cases, but rejected a judge's enhancement of an extra $4.5 million in a case against the state of Georgia.
The high court rejected enhanced fees for the attorneys who filed a lawsuit to reform the state-run foster care systems in Fulton and DeKalb counties. Senior U.S. District Judge Marvin Shoob had awarded the attorneys $6 million in legal fees and an additional $4.5 million for their performance in the case. The lawsuit resulted in a settlement that led to improved safety measures for foster children.
Justice Samuel Alito, writing the 5-4 majority opinion, said that courts can enhance attorney fees in "rare circumstances," but Shoob did not adequately justify his reasons for increasing the attorneys' fees by 75 percent. He said that "this figure appears to have been essentially arbitrary."
Alito sent the issue of the attorney fees back to the federal district court to be argued again. Alito said a trial judge’s discretion in awarding attorneys’ fees is not unlimited. Without an adequate explanation for enhancing an award of fees, “widely disparate awards may be made.”
Asked Alito, “Why, for example, did the court grant a 75-percent enhancement instead of the 100-percent increase [the lawyers] sought? And why 75 percent rather than 50 percent or 25 percent or 10 percent?”
Alito noted that the enhanced fees raised the top lawyers’ hourly rates from $495 an hour to more than $866 an hour.
When enhancing the award, Shoob said the plaintiffs’ lawyers had displayed “a higher degree of skill, commitment, dedication and professionalism” than he had seen during his 27 years on the bench. The outcome was extraordinary, Shoob said, adding that after 58 years as a lawyer and a judge, he was “unaware of any other case in which a plaintiff class has achieved such a favorable result on such a comprehensive scale."
Alito said, "We do not question the sincerity of [Shoob's] observations, and we are in no position to assess their accuracy."
One factor that can be considered, the ruling said, is a lawyers’ superior performance during the course of the litigation. But there must be “specific evidence” that supports an enhanced award, Alito said.
Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, said he expects the precedent set by Wednesday’s ruling will make it far more difficult for lawyers in such cases to receive enhanced fee awards. This also includes the lawyers in this case, he said.
“The whole mood and tone of the opinion is that it’s going to have to be an extraordinary situation,” Tobias said.
Both sides, the attorneys who filed the lawsuit and Georgia state officials, claimed the Supreme Court ruling as a victory.
Marcia Lowry, executive director for Children's Rights Inc., which filed the lawsuit, said the decision was a victory for attorneys fighting civil rights cases across the country, because it upheld the concept of enhanced attorney fees. Such civil rights cases often involve years of work without compensation, she said. The fee enhancement provides that these attorneys will receive market rates.
Gov. Sonny Perdue’s office also declared victory because Georgia taxpayers will not have to pay the additional $4.5 million during a budget crunch.
"We always felt it was an inappropriate amount of lawyers' fees," Perdue spokesman Bert Brantley said. Regarding the high court's treatment of Shoob's decision, Brantley said, "He was smacked down pretty good."
About the Author
Bill Rankin has been an AJC reporter for more than 30 years. His father, Jim Rankin, worked as an editor for the newspaper for 26 years, retiring in 1986. Bill has primarily covered the state’s court system, doing all he can do to keep the scales of justice on an even keel. Since 2015, he has been the host of the newspaper’s Breakdown podcast.
