 |
| Justice Helen Hoens |
Justice Helen Hoens said the justices saw no reason to abandon the fee-shifting principles it established in Rendine v. Pantzer, 141 N.J. 292 (1995). The Court there rejected the U.S. Supreme Court's declaration in City of Burlington v. Dague, 505 U.S. 557 (1992) that in federal civil rights cases courts may not increase fees to reflect the risk of non-payment assumed by prevailing plaintiffs' lawyers. - GWC
Court Upholds Rendine Fee Shifting, Declining To Follow U.S. High Court:
by Michael Booth - NJ Law Journal
"The state Supreme Court on Wednesday reaffirmed its nearly two-decade-old commitment to a doctrine that permits trial judges to enhance counsel fees in cases that might never be filed if not for the ability to shift fees.
In a consolidated ruling in two cases, the unanimous Court overturned two appellate rulings that followed the U.S. Supreme Court's holding, in Perdue v. Kenny A ., 130 S.Ct. 1662 (2010), that trial judges may award fees only in rare and extraordinary circumstances.
Justice Helen Hoens said the justices saw no reason to abandon the fee-shifting principles it established in Rendine v. Pantzer, 141 N.J. 292 (1995).
In one of the cases, Walker v. Guiffre, A-72-10, the Court reinstates a $99,000 legal fee on the plaintiff's $650 recovery in a suit accusing Route 22 Nissan Inc. and other car dealerships of fraudulently inflating fees in sales contracts."
In Humphries v. Powder Mill Shopping Plaza, A-100-10, a wheelchair-bound woman alleged disability discrimination at the Powder Mill Shopping Plaza in Morris Plains. Bobbie Humphries alleged the parking lot did not have enough handicap parking spaces, with some located on a lower level accessible only by stairs or a ramp with a dangerously steep incline. A settlement was reached which improved the access ramps and paid nominal compensation to the plaintiff. Attorneys fees of $97,000 were awarded by the trial court, a sum set aside by the Appellate Division. Edward Kopelson, the plaintiff's lawyer, should now get those fees and an award for his successful efforts on appeal.
The opinion is posted HERE.
'via Blog this'
In a consolidated ruling in two cases, the unanimous Court overturned two appellate rulings that followed the U.S. Supreme Court's holding, in Perdue v. Kenny A ., 130 S.Ct. 1662 (2010), that trial judges may award fees only in rare and extraordinary circumstances.
Justice Helen Hoens said the justices saw no reason to abandon the fee-shifting principles it established in Rendine v. Pantzer, 141 N.J. 292 (1995).
In one of the cases, Walker v. Guiffre, A-72-10, the Court reinstates a $99,000 legal fee on the plaintiff's $650 recovery in a suit accusing Route 22 Nissan Inc. and other car dealerships of fraudulently inflating fees in sales contracts."
In Humphries v. Powder Mill Shopping Plaza, A-100-10, a wheelchair-bound woman alleged disability discrimination at the Powder Mill Shopping Plaza in Morris Plains. Bobbie Humphries alleged the parking lot did not have enough handicap parking spaces, with some located on a lower level accessible only by stairs or a ramp with a dangerously steep incline. A settlement was reached which improved the access ramps and paid nominal compensation to the plaintiff. Attorneys fees of $97,000 were awarded by the trial court, a sum set aside by the Appellate Division. Edward Kopelson, the plaintiff's lawyer, should now get those fees and an award for his successful efforts on appeal.
The opinion is posted HERE.
'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment