Vargas v. Hudson County Bd. of Elections

Decision Date03 January 1992
Docket NumberNo. 91-5048,No. 91-5029,91-5049 and 91-5051,No. 91-5049,No. 91-5051,Nos. 91-5029,91-5048,91-5049,91-5051,91-5029,s. 91-5029
Citation949 F.2d 665
Parties, 21 Fed.R.Serv.3d 861 Josephine VARGAS, Martin Ellerbee, Marion Gargiulo, Joann Wheeler, Janice Sellers, Maria Rivera, Margarita Gonzalez, Appellants inv. HUDSON COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Hudson County Superintendent of Elections, Gerald McCann, individually and in his official capacity as former Mayor of the City of Jersey City, Matthew Burns; John Finn, Mark Munley. Hudson County Superintendent of Elections, Appellant inHudson County Board of Elections, Appellant inGerald McCANN v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA; J.R. Insurance Brokerage, Inc., and Johnson Excess Limited. John J. FINN v. J.R. INSURANCE BROKERAGE, INC., Johnson Excess Limited, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Mark MUNLEY v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, J.R. Insurance Brokerage, Inc., and Johnson Excess Limited. Matthew BURNS v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, J.R. Insurance Brokerage, Inc., and Johnson Excess Limited, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Appellant in
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

William J. Prout, Jr. (argued), George Gerard Campion, Gina J. Giongrete, Tompkins, McGuire & Wachenfeld, Newark, N.J., Michael B. Wallace, Luther T. Munford, Phelps Dunbar, Jackson, Miss., for Nat. Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa.

Samuel Issacharoff (argued), Austin, Tex., Barbara Arnwine, Frank Parker, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Washington, D.C., Juan Cartagena, Ruben Franco, Arthur Baer, Puerto Rican Legal Defense & Education Fund, New

York City, for Josephine Vargas, Martin Ellerbee, Marion Gargiulo, Joann Wheeler, Janice Sellers, Maria Rivera and Margarita Gonzalez.

Harold J. Ruvoldt, Jr. (argued), Ruvoldt & Ruvoldt, P.A., Joseph P. Healy, Jersey City, N.J., for Gerald McCann.

Morris M. Schnitzer (argued), Roseland, N.J., Gilbert W. Bowman, Bruinooge & Associates, Rutherford, N.J., for Mark Munley.

Robin B. Horn, Saiber Schlesinger Satz & Goldstein, Newark, N.J., for Matthew Burns.

Clifford A. Herrington (argued), Margulies, Wind, Herrington & Katz, Jersey City, N.J., for Hudson County Bd. of Elections.

Arthur L. Porter, Jr., (argued), Allan H. Klinger, Brach, Eichler, Rosenberg, Silver, Bernstein, Hammer & Gladstone, Roseland, N.J., for Hudson County Superintendent of Elections.

John J. Sheehy (argued), Sheehy & Sheehy, Jersey City, N.J., for J.R. Ins. Brokerage, Inc.

Before COWEN, NYGAARD, and WEIS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

In this appeal we determine that attorney's fees owed to a third-party were an element of damages sought by an indemnitee and, therefore, earlier rulings by the district court did not become appealable until an order quantified those fees. We also conclude that the district court did not err in finding that an insurer owed coverage for civil rights violations allegedly committed by its insured political campaign committees. However, we reverse an order granting a contingency enhancement of attorney's fees because the record establishes that the attorneys sought out the class representatives to bring the action.

The plaintiff class, consisting of certain citizens in Jersey City, New Jersey, filed a complaint alleging a conspiracy to prevent them from voting in an election for mayor of the City. Included as defendants were Gerald McCann, a candidate for mayor, and members of his campaign staff, Mark Munley, Matthew Burns, and John Finn, 1 as well as the Hudson County Board of Elections and the Superintendent of Elections.

The National Union Fire Insurance Company, which had written a general liability policy at the request of the McCann campaign committees, refused to defend or indemnify the individual defendants. The McCann defendants joined National Union as a third-party defendant, alleging that it had breached its duties under the policy. Also included as third-party defendants were Johnson Excess, Ltd. and J.R. Insurance Brokerage, Inc. The district court severed the third-party action from the class suit.

In due course, the district court granted summary judgment against National Union declaring that it owed coverage to the McCann defendants. The court, however, also left some issues in the third-party action to be resolved after trial of the class claims. Vargas v. Calabrese, 714 F.Supp. 714, 725-26 (D.N.J.1989).

Soon afterward, the McCann defendants settled the class plaintiffs' case. The court approved the settlements and after a hearing concluded they were enforceable against National Union. On April 24, 1990, the district court ordered National Union to indemnify the McCann defendants for the amounts of the settlements and for "the amount of any attorneys' fees award which may be made in favor of [class] plaintiffs and/or plaintiffs' attorneys against the [McCann] defendants." In addition, the court ordered National Union to reimburse those defendants for their own attorneys' fees.

On December 13, 1990, the district court entered an attorneys' fees and expense award in favor of the plaintiff class directing that two-thirds be paid by the McCann defendants and one-third jointly by the Hudson County Board of Elections and the County Superintendent of Elections. Vargas National Union filed its Notice of Appeal on January 11, 1991 from the December 13, 1990, and previous orders. Various parties have filed cross-appeals.

v. Calabrese, 750 F.Supp. 677, 690 (D.N.J.1990).

The parties have raised a number of issues that require further discussion of the facts. This amplification will be included in the consideration of the separate issues.

I. JURISDICTION

The McCann defendants and the class plaintiffs have moved to dismiss National Union's appeal of January 11, 1991, as untimely as to all orders other than that of December 13, 1990. They argue that the district court's order of April 24, 1990, was final and appealable, therefore this appeal as to that order and the earlier rulings is untimely.

National Union contends that the district court's order of December 13, 1990 quantifying the class attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 was the final order and that the Notice of Appeal was therefore filed within the thirty day period specified by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a).

As the district court's severance order implicitly acknowledged, the litigation in reality consists of two separate, but interrelated, claims. The class action sought damages and attorneys' fees against the McCann defendants and others for civil rights violations. National Union was not named as an original defendant in that suit.

The second claim is that brought by the McCann defendants against National Union seeking indemnification for damages and attorneys' fees that might be due the class plaintiffs, as well as attorneys' fees expended by the McCann defendants in defending the class action and, finally, attorneys' fees expended by the McCann defendants in connection with the suit brought against National Union. The latter two claims for attorneys' fees--that is, those for the McCann defendants' lawyers, are not challenged in the briefs and are not involved in the jurisdictional issue.

Although many orders were entered in this prolonged litigation, the timeliness issue requires that we focus only on a few.

1. The third-party action was based on the McCann defendants' contentions that National Union's general liability policy issued to the campaign committees applied to the civil rights claims made by the class plaintiffs and the carrier had wrongfully denied coverage. The district court agreed and in its order of June 1, 1989, granted the McCann defendants' motions for summary judgment against the insurance company "as to the duty to defend and indemnify [class] plaintiffs' claims regarding civil rights violations and intentional acts."

National Union did not at that point undertake the defense of the McCann defendants in the class suit. Shortly after the court entered its order, however, the McCann defendants negotiated settlements with the class plaintiffs. The agreements left open the amount of counsel fees to which the class would be entitled as a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

2. The next relevant order was that of April 24, 1990, in which the district court found the settlements with the class plaintiffs by the McCann defendants to be in good faith and directed indemnification by National Union. Included in that order was a requirement that National Union indemnify the McCann defendants for attorneys' fees awarded in favor of the class plaintiffs. At the time of that order, the class plaintiffs had not yet submitted a petition for fees.

3. It was not until its order of December 13, 1990, that the court fixed the attorneys' fees and expenses due the class plaintiffs and directed the McCann defendants to pay two-thirds of that amount.

The McCann defendants argue that the order of April 24, 1990, was final or, in the alternative, that the litigation as a whole became final for purposes of appealability when the district court entered an order in July of 1990 disposing of all remaining Resolution of this issue requires a discussion of Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co., 486 U.S. 196, 108 S.Ct. 1717, 100 L.Ed.2d 178 (1988). There, the Supreme Court adopted a "brightline" rule for attorneys' fees orders as they might affect finality for appeal purposes. The Court decided that "an unresolved issue of attorney's fees for the litigation in question does not prevent judgment on the merits from being final." Id. at 202, 108 S.Ct. at 1721-22.

                claims in the third party action. 2  In their view, the
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
38 cases
  • Becker v. Arco Chemical Co., CIV. A. 95-7191.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • July 22, 1998
    ...Citizens' Council for Clean Air, 483 U.S. 711, 731-33, 107 S.Ct. 3078, 97 L.Ed.2d 585 (1987)). See also Vargas v. Hudson County Board of Elections, 949 F.2d 665 (3d Cir.1991). The affidavits submitted by counsel were devoid of any reference to the four legal requirements articulated in Rode......
  • Excelsior Ins. Co. v. Pennsbury Pain Center
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • November 13, 1996
    ...standard of reasonableness and good faith required of settlement agreements, the Third Circuit, in Vargas v. Hudson County Board of Elections, et al., 949 F.2d 665, 674 (3d Cir.1991), held that "[i]n deciding whether a settlement is prudent and reasonable, a court must consider the risk to ......
  • Seidenberg v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • November 26, 1996
    ...100 N.J. at 336, 495 A.2d 406; DiOrio v. New Jersey Mfrs. Ins. Co., 79 N.J. 257, 269, 398 A.2d 1274 (1979); Vargas v. Hudson County Bd. of Elections, 949 F.2d 665, 672 (3d Cir.1991). An insurance contract should comport with the parties' intent and with the reasonable expectations of the in......
  • Ragan v. Tri-County Excavating, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • August 7, 1995
    ...the order does not become final and appealable until the attorney fees are quantified. Id. at 287. Accord Vargas v. Hudson County Bd. of Elections, 949 F.2d 665, 670 (3d Cir.1991) (where attorney fees are sought as part of damages, and not as prevailing party, the rule of Budinich v. Becton......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT