632 F.3d 553
9th Cir.2011Background
- Perez and class sued California prison officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Eighth Amendment violations in dental care.
- Parties settled and created a remedial plan; plaintiffs could recover attorney's fees, including monitoring the plan.
- District court approved the fee plan, allowing fees under PLRA § 1997e(d) and monitoring-related costs.
- In 2007, prison officials paid the requested fees, including paralegal rates; in 2008, they resisted a $169.50 paralegal rate.
- District court held $169.50/hour reasonable and below Bay Area market rates; ordered payment of $3,553.
- Appellants argued PLRA caps paralegal fees at $82.50/hour; the district court disagreed, and the issue was appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PLRA caps paralegal fees at the same rate as attorney fees | Perez argues Jenkins/Richlin allow paralegals at market rates up to $169.50. | Cate argues paralegal rates are capped by 150% of § 3006A, yielding $82.50. | Paralegal fees may be awarded up to $169.50/hour. |
| What benchmark rate under § 3006A governs the PLRA cap | Rate established under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A allows higher than $113 due to Judicial Conference guidance. | Cap must align with paralegal or district-specific guidelines, possibly lower. | Cap is 150% of the § 3006A rate; in Northern District of California, $169.50 was permissible. |
| Whether Jenkins/Richlin apply to PLRA for paralegals | Jenkins/Richlin authorize separately billed paralegal fees at market rates when attorney's fees are awarded. | PLRA does not expressly address paralegals; lower rates could be argued from policy. | Jenkins and Richlin govern; paralegal fees may be included at market rate under PLRA. |
| Whether district court abused discretion in awarding $169.50 paralegal rate | Rate is below market paralegal rate in Bay Area; justified by statutory cap. | Rate exceeded the permissible paralegal allowance under the PLRA. | No abuse; district court properly awarded $169.50/hour. |
Key Cases Cited
- Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274 (1989) (interprets 'reasonable attorney's fee' to include paralegal work where appropriate)
- Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff, 553 U.S. 571 (2008) (paralegal fees compensable under EAJA; supports Jenkins logic)
- Madrid v. Gomez, 190 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 1999) (supports policy goals of limiting frivolous prisoner suits)
- Comm'r v. Keystone Consolidated Indus., 508 U.S. 152 (1993) (presumption of congressional awareness of settled interpretations)