Carrion v. Yeshiva University, 71 Civ. 3007.
| Decision Date | 28 July 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 71 Civ. 3007.,71 Civ. 3007. |
| Citation | 397 F. Supp. 852 |
| Parties | Odessa CARRION, Plaintiff, v. YESHIVA UNIVERSITY, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Jack Greenberg, Eric Schnapper, James C. Gray, Jr., New York City, for plaintiff.
Sidney Schutz, New York City, for defendant Yeshiva University, by Daniel Riesel, New York City.
The question presented by defendant's post-trial motion for the award of attorney's fees and costs is whether this successful defendant in a Title VII action should be granted such an award against this employee-plaintiff who unsuccessfully contended that she had been denied promotion and had been subsequently fired on grounds of race. Concededly, discretion should be sparingly exercised in awarding attorney's fees and taxing costs against a Title VII plaintiff, as the entire legislative scheme embodied in that Title is to encourage persons aggrieved on racial grounds to come into court. See, Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. (1968) 390 U.S. 400, 402, 88 S.Ct. 964, 19 L.Ed.2d 1263; United States Steel Corp. v. United States (W.D.Pa.1974) 385 F.Supp. 346. However, this case presents an occasion for the exercise of such discretion.
Plaintiff was concededly denied promotion and she was concededly fired. Moreover, she had been active in filing complaints against her employer before the New York Human Rights Commission. The thrust of her claim was that all her troubles resulted from (a) racial discrimination and (b) retaliation for her activity in seeking legal redress for her alleged wrongs. After a two-day bench trial, I concluded that her testimony constituted an unmitigated tissue of lies; that no one had discriminated against her; and that the reason she was fired was that she had engaged in deliberately disruptive conduct* having nothing to do with the exercise of any constitutional or statutory right (but was motivated solely by spleen) and because she had defied reasonable attempts to control her activities. In the circumstances, I see no reason why Yeshiva University should be compelled to divert its funds to the defense of this vexatious lawsuit. United States Steel Corp. v. United States, supra.
The counsel fees sought ($5,000.00 for 120 hours of partner's time and 70 hours of associates' time) seems extremely moderate, in light of counsel's excellent performance. Moreover, it is undisputed that plaintiff is presently earning $25,000 a year, has no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carrion v. Yeshiva University
...to those made in open court at the close of the plaintiff's case. On the same date, Judge Knapp filed an opinion (reported at 397 F.Supp. 852) awarding Yeshiva counsel fees in the sum of $5,000 and discretionary costs of $630.36. This appeal was taken from the order dismissing the complaint......
-
Sek v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., Civ. A. No. 74-977.
...defendant, an award of attorney's fees is proper. U. S. Steel Corp. v. United States, supra, 519 F.2d at 364-65; Carrion v. Yeshiva University, 397 F.Supp. 852 (S.D. N.Y.1975); Robinson v. KMOX-TV, 407 F.Supp. 1272 This case bears several indicia of unreasonable, abusive conduct. Plaintiff'......
-
EEOC v. Ipco Hosp. Supply Co., 81 Civ. 5881 (WK).
...of dismissal, the defendant followed the Court's suggestion. Its motion for counsel fees is now before us. In Carrion v. Yeshiva University (S.D.N. Y.1975) 397 F.Supp. 852, aff'd (2d Cir.1976) 535 F.2d 722, we ... Discretion should be sparingly exercised in awarding attorney's fees and taxi......