![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the Western District of New York
March 10, 2006, Decided
[*133] DECISION AND ORDER
On July 10, 2003, this Court granted summary judgment in favor of all defendants in this civil rights action against the Rochester City School District ("District"), the Rochester Teachers Association ("RTA"), and a number of individual defendants. In my summary judgment decision, 273 F. Supp. 2d 292 (W.D.N.Y. 2003) (familiarity with which is assumed), I noted that the RTA had moved for attorney's fees, but I deferred deciding the motions until the appellate process had concluded. Id. at 327 n. 30. That has now occurred. On July 28, 2004, the Court of [**4] Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed my summary judgment decision dismissing the complaint, "substantially for the reasons given by the district court." 106 Fed.Appx. 746, 747.
Both defendants, as prevailing parties, now move for an award of attorney's fees against plaintiff, Donald Murphy ("Murphy"), under the fee-shifting provisions of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1988, 2000e-5(k), and 12205. The District seeks $ 562,322 in fees; the RTA seeks $ 416,273. 1
This is-presumably-the last chapter in litigation between Murphy and defendants [*134] that was commenced over a decade ago. As noted in my summary judgment decision, 273 F. Supp.2d at 297, the case has grown from a simple employment dispute over one teacher's interschool transfer, into a gargantuan, broad-based campaign [**5] against an entire school system. Much of the blame for that can be laid at plaintiff's feet, for he, acting through his then-attorney, chose to use this action as a vehicle to launch a "virtual crusade" against defendants, id., in which every injustice, insult, or inconvenience, real or imagined, that Murphy believed he had suffered in his employment was alleged to be a violation of plaintiff's civil rights. It is because of that misuse of the judicial process that I grant, in part, defendants' motions for attorney's fees. Plaintiff, Donald Murphy, is hereby ordered to pay defendants a total of $ 270,000 for attorney's fees.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
420 F. Supp. 2d 131 *; 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9673 **
DONALD MURPHY, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE ROCHESTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Defendants.
Prior History: Love v. Potter, 2003 EEOPUB LEXIS 830 (E.E.O.C., Feb. 18, 2003)Murphy v. Bd. of Educ., 106 Fed. Appx. 746, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 15544 (2d Cir. N.Y., July 28, 2004)
attorney's fees, defendants', prevailing, expenses, motions, summary judgment, rights, sanctions, frivolous, allegations, groundless, deterrent, monthly, prevailing party, discovery, Teachers, costs, moot, deposition, meritless, Recusal
Civil Rights Law, Procedural Matters, Costs & Attorney Fees, Statutory Attorney Fee Awards, Labor & Employment Law, Disability Discrimination, Remedies, Costs & Attorney Fees, Title VII Discrimination, Civil Procedure, Attorney Fees & Expenses, General Overview, Reasonable Fees