Skip to main content

FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS

Fox v. Vice

Issues

1. When a plaintiff asserts both frivolous and nonfrivolous claims based on the same set of facts, can a court award the defendant attorneys’ fees for the frivolous claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, even though the defendant still has to defend against the nonfrivolous claims?

2. When a court awards a defendant attorneys’ fees under Section 1988 after dismissing a frivolous claim, must the court attempt to match the amount of the fees to the cost of defending the frivolous claim?

 

In 2005, Petitioner Ricky D. Fox ran for Police Chief of Respondent Vinton, Louisiana ("the Town"). During the campaign, Respondent Billy Ray Vice, the incumbent Police Chief, attempted to blackmail Fox and damage his public image. Fox won the  election,  but sued Vice and the Town for attempting to derail his campaign. Among Fox’s claims was a civil rights allegation under a federal statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Following discovery in Fox’s civil case, Vice and the Town moved for summary judgment on the federal claim. Fox withdrew the claim, conceding that he failed to assert the required elements, but continued to pursue his state-based tort claims. The defendants then moved for attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, arguing that Fox’s federal claim was frivolous. The district court granted the defendants’ motion, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed on appeal. Fox argues that in a case with factually intertwined claims, a defendant must prevail over an entire lawsuit in order to receive attorneys’ fees. Vice and the Town, however, claim that nothing in Section 1988 prevents defendants from receiving attorneys’ fees for individual frivolous claims. The Supreme Court’s  decision in this case  will address Section 1988’s purpose of encouraging meritorious civil rights  claims,  while discouraging groundless claims.

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

1. May a court award attorneys’ fees to a defendant under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 based on a voluntary dismissal of one claim in an action where the defendants must still defend against nonfrivolous claims that are factually intertwined?

2. May a court award defendants all of the attorneys’ fees they incurred in an action under § 1988 without any effort to isolate the fees attributable to the single dismissed claim?

In early 2005, Ricky D. Fox, a retired state trooper, announced his intention to run for Police Chief of his hometown of Vinton, Louisiana ("the Town"). See Fox v. Vice, 594 F.3d 423, 425 (5th Cir. 2010); Brief for Petitioner, Ricky D.

Written by

Edited by

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank former Supreme Court Reporter of Decisions Frank Wagner for his assistance in editing this preview.

Additional Resources

• Section 1983 Blog: Attorneys’ Fees in Civil Rights Cases: A Brief Summary (Sept. 1, 2009)

• Crime & Federalism: Sec. 1988/Attorneys’ Fees Case (July 19, 2005)

Submit for publication
0
Subscribe to FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS