Cleopatra DeLeon v. Greg Abbott
687 F. App'x 340
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Plaintiffs (DeLeon, Dimetman, Holmes, Phariss) successfully challenged Texas provisions limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples; judgment entered after Obergefell.
- Plaintiffs sought attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and costs under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54; district court awarded $585,470.30 in fees and $20,202.90 in costs.
- Texas appealed, arguing the award was excessive and included non-compensable categories of work.
- The district court reduced the raw hours by 35% (plaintiffs had also voluntarily excluded roughly 35% of billed time) and otherwise found the remaining rates and hours reasonable.
- The Fifth Circuit majority affirmed the award, applying deferential abuse-of-discretion review and emphasizing district-court discretion and the "rough justice" standard for fee shifting.
- Judge Elrod concurred in part and dissented in part, agreeing with most of the award but arguing certain categories (intervention-related, media-related, and work soliciting/coordinating amici) are non-compensable and should be excluded or remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall fee and cost award reasonableness | Requested fees and costs are reasonable after voluntary reductions | Award is excessive and includes non-compensable time | Affirmed: district court did not abuse discretion in reductions or overall award |
| Fees for work opposing third-party intervention | Time spent opposing intervention is part of litigation and compensable | Intervention-related time is not recoverable because defendant (Texas) was neutral; plaintiffs did not "prevail" against Texas on intervention | Dissent: such time should be excluded; majority affirmed without addressing Hopwood |
| Fees for media-related activities | Media contacts were part of litigation strategy and should be compensated | Media-related time is not "expended on the litigation" and is generally non-compensable | Dissent: media time not compensable without showing direct, substantial contribution to litigation success; majority affirmed award |
| Fees for soliciting/coordinating/supporting amici | Coordinating amici is part of litigation support and compensable | Amici are not parties; soliciting/coordinating amici should not be billed to the losing defendant | Dissent: such amici-solicitation/coordination time should be excluded; majority affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Abbott, 781 F.3d 207 (5th Cir.) (standard of appellate review for fee awards)
- La. Power & Light Co. v. Kellstrom, 50 F.3d 319 (5th Cir. 1995) (district court fact findings on rates/hours reviewed for clear error)
- Hopwood v. Texas, 236 F.3d 256 (5th Cir. 2000) (discussion of non-recoverability of intervention-related fees when defendant neutral)
- Rum Creek Coal Sales, Inc. v. Caperton, 31 F.3d 169 (4th Cir. 1994) (intervention-related fees not recoverable by prevailing plaintiff against losing defendant)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (lodestar and hours "expended on the litigation" standard)
- Fox v. Vice, 563 U.S. 826 (2011) (district courts need not achieve auditing perfection; may use estimates)
- Associated Builders & Contractors of La. v. Orleans Par. Sch. Bd., 919 F.2d 374 (5th Cir. 1990) (district court's broad discretion in setting fee awards)
- Independent Fedn. of Flight Attendants v. Zipes, 491 U.S. 754 (1989) (limits on recovering fees from intervenors)
- Watkins v. Fordice, 7 F.3d 453 (5th Cir.) (media/press-related time exclusion affirmed)