James v. City of Boise
Decision Date | 25 January 2016 |
Docket Number | No. 15–493.,15–493. |
Citation | 136 S.Ct. 685,193 L.Ed.2d 694,577 U.S. 306 |
Parties | Melene JAMES v. CITY OF BOISE, IDAHO, et al. |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
John A. Bush, Boise, ID, Richard H. Seamon, Moscow, ID, for Petitioner.
Scott B. Muir, Deputy City Attorney, Boise, ID, for Respondents.
Under federal law, a court has discretion to "allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee" in a civil rights lawsuit filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 42 U.S.C. § 1988. In Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 101 S.Ct. 173, 66 L.Ed.2d 163 (1980) (per curiam ), this court interpreted § 1988 TO PERMIT A PREVAILING defendant in such a suit to recover fees only if "the plaintiff's action was frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation." Id., at 14, 101 S.Ct. 173 (quoting Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC, 434 U.S. 412, 421, 98 S.Ct. 694, 54 L.Ed.2d 648 (1978) (internal quotation marks omitted)).
In the decision below, the Idaho Supreme Court concluded that it was not bound by this Court's interpretation of § 1988 in Hughes . According to that court, "[a]lthough the Supreme Court may have the authority to limit the discretion of lower federal courts, it does not have the authority to limit the discretion of state courts where such limitation is not contained in the statute." 158 Idaho 713, 734, 351 P.3d 1171, 1192 (2015). The court then proceeded to award attorney's fees under § 1988 to a prevailing defendant without first determining that "the plaintiff's action was frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation." The court's fee award rested solely on its interpretation of federal law; the court explicitly refused to award fees under state law. Id., at 734–735, 351 P.3d, at 1192–1193. We grant certiorari, and now reverse.
Section 1988 is a federal statute. "It is this Court's responsibility to say what a [federal] statute means, and once the Court has spoken, it is the duty of other courts to respect that understanding of the governing rule of law." Nitro–Lift Technologies, L.L.C. v. Howard, 568 U.S. ––––, ––––, 133 S.Ct. 500, 503, 184 L.Ed.2d 328 (2012) (per curiam ) (quoting Rivers v. Roadway Express, Inc., 511 U.S. 298, 312, 114 S.Ct. 1510, 128 L.Ed.2d 274 (1994) (internal quotation marks omitted)). And for good reason. As Justice Story explained 200 years ago, if state courts were permitted to disregard this Court's rulings on federal law, Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304, 348, 4...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Stratakos v. Nassau Cnty.
...fee award to prevailing plaintiffs in a civil rights lawsuit filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. James v. City of Boise , 577 U.S. 306, 306, 136 S.Ct. 685, 193 L.Ed.2d 694 (2016) ; Perdue v. Kenny A. ex rel. Winn , 559 U.S. 542, 550, 130 S.Ct. 1662, 176 L.Ed.2d 494 (2010) ; Hensley v. Ecker......
-
Wesco Ins. Co. v. Roderick Linton Belfance, LLP
...fees awards only if they show that a suit "was frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation." James v. City of Boise , 577 U.S. 306, 306, 136 S.Ct. 685, 193 L.Ed.2d 694 (2016) (per curiam) (citation omitted); see Christiansburg , 434 U.S. at 421, 98 S.Ct. 694.How would the average lawyer ......
-
State v. Booker
...of the United States Supreme Court. West v. Schofield, 519 S.W.3d 550, 566 (Tenn. 2017) (citing James v. City of Boise, 577 U.S. 306, 307, 136 S.Ct. 685, 193 L.Ed.2d 694 (2016) (per curiam) ("The Idaho Supreme Court, like any other state or federal court, is bound by this Court's interpreta......
-
Wimberly v. Williams
...I look to U.S. Supreme Court caselaw as the ultimate authority to answer this question. See, e.g. , James v. City of Boise , 577 U.S. 306, 307, 136 S.Ct. 685, 193 L.Ed.2d 694 (2016) (explaining that all state and federal courts are "bound by th[e Supreme] Court's interpretation of federal l......
-
The Weaponization of Attorney's Fees in an Age of Constitutional Warfare.
...1983 suits are bound by the same fee-shifting principles as federal courts. See Thiboutot, 448 U.S. at 11-12; James v. City of Boise, 577 U.S. 306, 306-07 (2016) (summarily reversing the Idaho Supreme Court's conclusion that it was not bound by the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of the......
-
GAMING CERTIORARI.
...73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35, 43 (1868) ("The people of these United States constitute one nation."). (223) See, e.g., James v. City of Boise, 577 U.S. 306, 307 (2016) (per curiam) ("The Idaho Supreme Court, like any other state or federal court, is bound by this Court's interpretation of federal (......