class 25 & 26 Flashcards
criminal direct
an outburst or behavior that causes the judge to stop or interrupt the proceeding. direct because it is happening in front of the judge
criminal indirect
interruption to a court proceeding that does not happen in view of the judge
collateral bar rule
you can’t say the injunction is unlawful as a defense to contempt- refusal to comply with court order
Contempt
contempt is a courts power to enforce its own orders. when someone disobeys a courts order for an equitable remedy, the consequence is that they can be found in contempt of court and face a sanction.
civil contempt
- the underlying order sets forth an ambiguous command;
- D violated that command;
- D violation was significant- it did not comply with the order; and
- D failed to take steps to reasonably and diligently comply with the order
purge clause
in an ambiguous situation, its more likely to be civil than criminal because of the purge clause
jury trials
legal remedies/ money damages are heard by juries
equitable issues are heard by a judge
federal courts
prioritize jury trials.
the facts and issues necessary to determine whether to award the legal remedy must first be decided by a jury. anything that is related to the legal remedy will be decided by the jury. after the facts and legal remedy are decided first, then the judge comes in and makes an equitable determination
state courts
prioritize equitable claims
if the remedy is mostly equitable then judge will make the determination on the equitable issues first (including the merits of the action) with the jury possibly coming in later to resolve any remaining non-incidental legal remedies.
Anything that the first fact finder determines are binding on the second fact finder
Hoopes v. Dolan
fighting over a parking lot.
sued to determine rights- D says this is equitable estoppel ( for allowing joint use for years)
state court- jury first. jury said P. then judge decides the equitable stuff. judge ignores the jury ruling and finds for the D. P appeals. judge is supposed to be bound by the findings of the jury.
equitable defense was based on separate facts that the jury had not dealt with.
American rule
pay own way- pay your own attys fees
two exceptions to American rule
may be awarded to the prevailing party when provided by state or provided by the terms of a contract
prevailing party costs and fees
big motivation by the party bringing the case to be sure that they have a good case.
prevailing party rule application is determined by the legislature; contract terms, discrimination claims (if shown to be frivolous), domestic violence restraining orders (if shown to be frivolous)
who is a prevailing party
the “winning” party is not automatically the prevailing party. the trial court is given broad discretion to decide who prevailed in the action for purposes of an attorney fee award.
factors:
were the merits resolved in favor of the party brining the claim, was the litigation objective met, were the issues novel, did the lawsuit create a catalyst for change, did the lawsuit encourage settlement, how much was awarded overall
calculating attys fees
judge discretion
the lodestar method (most common) or percentage method
lodestar method
reasonable hours worked (based on the case) X a reasonable rate (based on experience, skill, typical rate in the relative geographical area with a comparable level of experience and skill)
Billing records are evidence- baseline for hours worked, and rate charged.
lodestar multiplier: the lodestar calculation can be increased by a multiplier in contingency fee cases to account for the risk taken by the attorney when working on a contingency basis or in recognition of the quality of the representation, the novelty and complexity of the issues, and the results obtained. typical multiplier is 1-2 with a presumptive cap of 4.
percentage method
usually when a settlement agreement establishes a relief fund for the class action and a percentage of the share of the common fund is used for attys fees.
the amount of the % is in the discretion of the trial court by looking at:
trial courts own familiarity with the case and the work of the attys. (how hard did the atty work? how risky was the case for the atty to take?)
value of the litigation to the public and ppl who wouldn’t be able to pay for this
and novelty of the issue
lodestar cross-check
used with % method to check how crazy the award is.
wants to check the reasonableness (discretionary) comparison between percentage and the lodestar calculations produces a multiplier outside the normal range
judge cannot just do a blanket reduction
can say that the amount of hours or the rate was unreasonable but can’t call it reasonable and then reduce anyway
williams v. reed
the US Supreme Court recently held that a P is not required to exhaust state admin remedies as a prerequisite to brining a federal civil rights claim in state court under 1983
remedies for civil rights violations
injunctions, damages and attys fees (want to incentives this work)
structural injunctions
changes to policy of entire organizations- school desegregation, racial profiling, medical access for prisoners
remedies for police violence
money or injunctions
