936 F.3d 442
6th Cir.2019Background
- In 2015 Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis refused to issue any marriage licenses after Obergefell, blocking same-sex and opposite-sex couples from obtaining licenses in Rowan County.
- Plaintiffs (four couples) sued Davis in her individual and official capacities and obtained a district-court preliminary injunction requiring Davis to allow issuance of marriage licenses; Davis resisted and was briefly jailed for contempt before deputy clerks issued licenses.
- After Kentucky altered the license form and executive action removed clerks’ names from the form, appeals were dismissed and the district court vacated the preliminary injunction; plaintiffs’ damages claims were also dismissed as moot.
- Plaintiffs sought attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; the district court awarded $222,695 and assessed liability against the Commonwealth of Kentucky (not the Clerk’s Office or Rowan County).
- Defendants (including successor Clerk Elwood Caudill, Jr. and Kentucky Officials) appealed, contesting (1) whether plaintiffs were "prevailing parties," (2) which entity must pay fees, and (3) the fee amount.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs were "prevailing parties" under § 1988 | The preliminary injunction compelled issuance of licenses and gave plaintiffs the relief they sought | Plaintiffs only secured a preliminary injunction (not final relief); some plaintiffs never obtained licenses or wed, so they did not prevail | Plaintiffs prevailed — the injunction produced a court-ordered, material, enduring change (opportunity to obtain licenses) and thus qualifies them as prevailing parties (de novo review) |
| Standard of review for "prevailing party" determination | N/A (plaintiffs argued issue merits) | Caudill/Kentucky Officials relied on mixed precedent for review | Court holds de novo review controls (Sole v. Wyner abrogates earlier clear-error approach) |
| Which governmental entity is liable for fee award | Fees should be assessed against entity on whose behalf Davis acted when denying licenses (the Commonwealth) | Caudill/Kl rk’s Office or Rowan County argue liability should be at county/office level | Using a modified Crabbs test, court finds Davis acted on behalf of the Commonwealth (state controls marriage licensing); Commonwealth is liable; Rowan County/Clerk’s Office not liable |
| Reasonableness/amount of fee award | Plaintiffs: lodestar $222,695, full recovery because all claims were related to core dispute | Caudill: award should be substantially reduced because plaintiffs obtained only a preliminary injunction | Court affirms district court’s lodestar calculation and decision not to reduce fee (district court did not abuse discretion) |
Key Cases Cited
- Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (U.S. 2015) (recognized constitutional right to same-sex marriage)
- Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678 (U.S. 1978) (official-capacity injunctions treated as suits against the State for fee allocation)
- Sole v. Wyner, 551 U.S. 74 (U.S. 2007) (reviewed prevailing-party status de novo)
- McQueary v. Conway, 614 F.3d 591 (6th Cir. 2010) (standards for fee recovery on preliminary injunctions; material/enduring change test)
- Crabbs v. Scott, 786 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2015) (multi-factor test for determining if an official acts on State or local government’s behalf)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (U.S. 1983) (lodestar method and relatedness of claims for fee awards)
- Geier v. Sundquist, 372 F.3d 784 (6th Cir. 2004) (describing lodestar calculation in this Circuit)
- Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home v. West Virginia Dep’t of Health & Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598 (U.S. 2001) (American Rule and exceptions for prevailing parties)