Emma C., et al v. Eastin, et al

Filing 2591

Order by Judge Vince Chhabria denying 2565 Motion for Attorney Fees. (vclc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/29/2020)

Case 3:96-cv-04179-VC Document 2591 Filed 06/29/20 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EMMA C., et al.,

Case No. 96-cv-04179-VC

Plaintiffs,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
FEES

v.
TONY THURMOND, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 2565

Defendants.

Morgan Hill’s motion for attorneys’ fees is denied. Morgan Hill argues that it is entitled
to recover either under the fee provisions of the consent decree, or under a theory that the fees
are recoverable as costs incurred to implement or enforce the decree. Neither theory justifies a
fee award. First, the consent decree allows plaintiffs to recover reasonable fees, and Morgan Hill
agrees that it is not a plaintiff in this case. See First Amended Consent Decree, Dkt. No. 2571-2,
at 23; Reply in Support of Mot. for Fees, Dkt. No. 2573, at 4. And second, Morgan Hill cannot
reasonably be described as a “judicial recruit” that “worked . . . on implementing the [consent
decree].” Reply, Dkt. No. 2573, at 4. Morgan Hill’s submission of amicus briefs was entirely
voluntary (and in any event, of little substantive worth).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 29, 2020
______________________________________
VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge