Printer Friendly

Attorney Fees.

U.S. District Court


Booth v. Barton County, KS, 157 F.Supp.2d 1178 (D.Kan. 2001). An inmate and a former inmate brought an action seeking injunctive relief under [ss] 1983, alleging unconstitutional conditions of confinement at a county jail. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The court found that the former inmate's claims, which sought only injunctive relief, were moot since the inmate had been released and was no longer a prisoner. The court refused to let the female inmate raise clams of gender-based unequal treatment at the summary judgment stage of trial because she failed to introduce the claims in her complaint, or at the pretrial conference. The female inmate had asked permission to allege that the jail had an insufficient number of female officers to provide equal exercise to female inmates, and that the jail's male-only trustee policy resulted in more exercise time for male inmates. The jail was allegedly designed to accommodate 19 inmates but bad a policy of housing up to 72 inmat es. (Barton County Jail, Kansas)

U.S. Appeals Court

PLRA-Prison Litigation Reform Act


Foulk v. Charrier 262 F.3d 687 (8th Cir. 2001). A prisoner brought a [ss] 1983 action against a corrections officer alleging the use of excessive force in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights. The district court entered judgment on a jury verdict, awarded nominal damages of $1 plus interest and costs, and awarded attorney fees. The appeals court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and reversed in part. The appeals court held that the award of nominal damages for an Eighth Amendment violation was permissible, and that the finding of use of excessive force was supported by evidence. The appeals court found that the award of attorney fees was subject to the cap established by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), and that the PLRA cap on attorney fees did not violate the equal protection clause. The court noted that under the provisions of PLRA, if non-monetary relief of some kind had been ordered, whether or not there was also a monetary award, the attorney fees cap would not apply. (Moberly Correctional Center, Missouri)

U.S. Appeals Court

PLRA-Prison Litigation Reform Act

Volk v. Gozalez. 262 F.3d 528 (5th Cir. 2001). A state prison inmate who brought a civil rights suit against a prison warden and correctional officers and was awarded $2.00 in nominal damages, in addition to declaratory and injunctive relief, sought attorney fees, costs and expenses. He was awarded half of his requested attorney and legal assistant fees and $658 in costs. On appeal the judgment was affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded for redetermination of the fee award for work done after the effective date of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). The district court applied the PLRA fee cap, which limits the defendant's liability to 150% of the damages award and the inmate appealed. The appeals court held that application of the $3 fee cap was appropriate for post-PLRA attorney and legal assistant fees, and was enforceable. (Texas)
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2001, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:prisoner litigation
Publication:Corrections Caselaw Quarterly
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Nov 1, 2001
Previous Article:Assessment of costs.
Next Article:Bail.

Related Articles
U.S. Appeals Court: PLRA-Prison Litigation Reform Act LIMITATION.
U.S. Appeals Court: PLRA-Prison Litigation Reform Act.
U.S. Appeals Court: CLAIMS PLRA-Prison Litigation Reform Act.
U.S. Appeals Court: SEPARATION.
Access to court.
Access to court.
Attorney fess.
Bowman v. Corrections Corp. of America.
Riley v. Kurtz.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters