ETHICS & ATTORNEY'S FEES CASES

• Hahnemann Univ. Hosp. v. All Shore, Inc.
• Little v. Mitsubishi Motors N. Am., Inc.
• Gabriel v. Hamlin
• Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth
• Dist. of Columbia v. Jeppsen
• Northwest Energetic Servs., LLC v. Cal. Franchise Tax Bd.

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, January 29, 2008
Hahnemann Univ. Hosp. v. All Shore, Inc., No. 05-4628, 06-1825
Awarding a prevailing party attorney's fees for pre-litigation administrative proceedings under ERISA is inappropriate. In an action brought by plaintiff-hospital to recover benefits owed pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 1132(a)(1)(B) of ERISA, summary judgment and an award of attorney's fees and costs for plaintiff is affirmed in part as to the summary judgment ruling, but vacated as to the fees award where the district court improperly included the amount of time spent by plaintiff's counsel during the pre-litigation administrative process. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 30, 2008
Little v. Mitsubishi Motors N. Am., Inc., No. 07-2392
In a suit against a former employer-Mitsubishi alleging that it discriminated against plaintiff on the basis of race when it laid him off as part of a reduction in force, a judgment awarding costs to Mitsubishi is affirmed where the award of costs for copies, computerized research, summonses, subpoenas, delivery services and a video-recorded deposition was authorized by 28 U.S.C. section 1920. Amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(2)-(3) now permits district courts to tax the costs of stenographically transcribing a video-recorded deposition. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, February 01, 2008
Gabriel v. Hamlin, No. 06-3636
In a prisoner's-rights suit filed after being plaintiff was seriously injured while working in a prison kitchen, denial of a continuance and dismissal of plaintiff's case with prejudice for failure to prosecute is reversed where no conduct on plaintiff's part justified the severe sanction. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, February 01, 2008
Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth, No. 05-35627
To prove that a bundled discount was exclusionary or predatory for the purposes of a monopolization or attempted monopolization claim under section 2 of the Sherman Act, the plaintiff must establish that, after allocating the discount given by the defendant on the entire bundle of products to the competitive products, the defendant sold the competitive products below its average variable cost of producing them. (Amended opinion) Read more...

U.S. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, February 01, 2008
Dist. of Columbia v. Jeppsen, No. 06-7200
In suit challenging ruling that plaintiff district may not move a hearing disabled student into the public school system, dismissal of suit as moot and denial of mother's application for attorney fees is remanded as dismissal was a decision on the merits and mother is thus eligible for attorney fees as the prevailing party under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, January 31, 2008
Northwest Energetic Servs., LLC v. Cal. Franchise Tax Bd., No. A114805
Judgment awarding plaintiff a refund of amounts paid under Revenue and Taxation Code section 17942 is affirmed as former section 17942, as applied to plaintiff, violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution and plaintiff is entitled to a refund. Trial court's order does not support an award attorney's fees to plaintiff greater than the lodestar. Read more...