For Immediate Release
Contact
Susan Lehman, 212–998–6318
Mike Webb, 212–998–6746
Laura Abel, 212–998–6737
Today,
29 public interest groups and small civil rights firms argued “enormous
collateral damage” could result in future pro bono and civil rights
cases if the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit does not
reconsider its recent ruling in a case called Arbor Hill Concerned
Citizens Neighborhood Association v. County of Albany.
In a friend of the court brief
filed by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, Jenner
& Block, and Hofstra Law School professor Leon Friedman, the 29
amici explain that the ruling invites judges to reduce attorney fee
awards whenever they conclude that lawyers working on behalf of their
clients either personally agreed with their clients’ claims or were
motivated by “reputational” goals.
The amici argue that the
Second Circuit’s ruling overlooked controlling Supreme Court decisions
and the mandate of Congress in the 1976 Civil Rights Award Act when it
declared attorney fees could be reduced on the grounds that a
hypothetical paying client would have been able to talk a pro bono or
public interest lawyer into handling a civil rights case for less money
than a lawyer would charge in a commercial matter. The amici also point
out that the ruling creates an intrusive test that requiring inspection
of lawyers’ personal belief systems, that attorneys handling civil
rights cases should receive the same fees as attorneys litigating
comparable complex federal litigation, and that courts should look to
objective criteria such as prevailing market rates when setting fees.
“This
ruling places the future of pro bono work in jeopardy, as existing
resources are grossly inadequate to meet the civil legal needs of
low-income people,” said David Udell, director of the Justice Program
at the Brennan Center and one of the brief’s authors. “The result is
that our nation’s civil rights laws are already under-enforced, and
civil rights violations proliferate. This opinion threatens to make a
bad situation far worse.”
In the Arbor Hill case, a law firm had
successfully represented community-based organizations in challenging a
legislative redistricting plan in Albany County, New York, which had
threatened to dilute the power of minority voters. Thanks to the firm’s
work, the redistricting plan was redrawn, and a new election was held.
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York held
under the Voting Rights Act that the defendants must pay attorneys’
fees, but ruled that the fees should be paid at the rate charged by
attorneys in the Northern District, not the rate charged by attorneys
in the Southern District where the firm’s offices are located. In
rejecting the reasoning of the lower court, the Court of Appeals
propounded its novel “hypothetical reasonable, paying client” approach,
and held that in light of the firm’s pro bono role, the matter need not
be reconsidered by the lower court since it would be unlikely to award
more fees.
Amici in the case include: the American Civil
Liberties Union, the League of Women Voters of NY, the National
Association of Consumer Advocates, the National Senior Citizens Law
Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, NY Public Interest Research
Group, and other public interest and civil rights law firms.
Brennan
Center counsel David Udell, Laura Abel and Deborah Goldberg,
represented the amici. Leon Friedman also represented the amici. Jenner
& Block counsel Joshua Block, Harry Sandick, and Jeremy Creelan
represented the Brennan Center.
# # #