Charles E. v. Dep't of Justice

14 Cited authorities

Hensley v. Eckerhart
461 U.S. 424 (1983) Cited 22,087 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding a civil-rights plaintiff can recover attorney's fees for claims that "involve a common core of facts or will be based on related legal theories," even if only one of those claims arises under a fee-shifting statute
U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens
460 U.S. 711 (1983) Cited 2,419 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination
Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,671 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody
422 U.S. 405 (1975) Cited 2,629 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employment policy cannot stand if another policy, "without a similarly undesirable racial effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate interest"
Pullman-Standard v. Swint
456 U.S. 273 (1982) Cited 1,625 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"
Memphis Community School Dist. v. Stachura
477 U.S. 299 (1986) Cited 1,340 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that damages awards under section 1983 "may include not only out-of-pocket loss and other monetary harms, but also such injuries such as . . . mental anguish and suffering"
Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.
424 U.S. 747 (1976) Cited 1,099 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that the interests of "unnamed members of the class" who are entitled to relief may satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement
West v. Gibson
527 U.S. 212 (1999) Cited 113 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the phrase "appropriate remedies" in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–16(b) includes remedies not expressly enumerated
Coutin v. Young Rubicam Puerto Rico, Inc.
124 F.3d 331 (1st Cir. 1997) Cited 223 times
Finding an award of over $45,000 substantial, especially in view of the fact that it represented three times the plaintiff's yearly salary
U.S. v. Metropolitan Dist. Com'n
847 F.2d 12 (1st Cir. 1988) Cited 172 times
Approving of District Court's decision to deviate from typical approach to calculating fee award where characteristics of case justified different approach
Section 2000e - Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 2000e Cited 52,419 times 130 Legal Analyses
Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions
Section 2000e-16 - Employment by Federal Government
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16 Cited 5,023 times 20 Legal Analyses
Adopting provisions of § 2000e-5(f)-(k), including that "[e]ach United States district court . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this subchapter"

Charles E. v. Dep't of Justice

14 Cited authorities

Holding a civil-rights plaintiff can recover attorney's fees for claims that "involve a common core of facts or will be based on related legal theories," even if only one of those claims arises under a fee-shifting statute

Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination

Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

Holding that an employment policy cannot stand if another policy, "without a similarly undesirable racial effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate interest"

Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"

Holding that damages awards under section 1983 "may include not only out-of-pocket loss and other monetary harms, but also such injuries such as . . . mental anguish and suffering"

Holding that the interests of "unnamed members of the class" who are entitled to relief may satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement

Holding that the phrase "appropriate remedies" in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–16(b) includes remedies not expressly enumerated

Finding an award of over $45,000 substantial, especially in view of the fact that it represented three times the plaintiff's yearly salary

Approving of District Court's decision to deviate from typical approach to calculating fee award where characteristics of case justified different approach

Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions

Adopting provisions of § 2000e-5(f)-(k), including that "[e]ach United States district court . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this subchapter"