Source: http://www.chanrobles.com/usa/us_supremecourt/416/696/
Timestamp: 2019-07-20 19:42:42
Document Index: 248562052

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 718', '§ 718', '§ 718', '§ 718', '§ 718', '§ 718', '§ 718']

BRADLEY V. SCHOOL BD. OF RICHMOND, 416 U. S. 696 (1974) - US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON-LINE
US Supreme Court Decisions On-Line> Volume 416 > BRADLEY V. SCHOOL BD. OF RICHMOND, 416 U. S. 696 (1974)
BRADLEY V. SCHOOL BD. OF RICHMOND, 416 U. S. 696 (1974)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 416 U. S. 696
Following initial submission of the case to the Court of Appeals, but before its decision, Congress enacted § 718 of the Education Amendments of 1972, which granted a federal court authority to award the prevailing party a chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
Page 416 U. S. 697
reasonable attorney's fee when appropriate upon entry of a final order in a school desegregation case, the applicability of which to this and other litigation the court then considered. In the other cases, the court held that § 718 did not apply to services rendered prior to July 1, 1972, the effective date of § 718, and, in this case, reasoned that there were no orders pending or appealable on either May 26, 1971, when the District Court made its fee award, or on July 1, 1972, and that, therefore, § 718 could not be used to sustain the award.
(b) Such injustice could result "in mere private cases between individuals," 5 U. S. 110, the determinative factors being the nature and identity of the parties, the nature of their rights, and the nature of the impact of the change in law upon those rights. Upon consideration of those aspects here (see [email protected], (c)-(e)), it cannot be said that the application of the statute would cause injustice. Pp. 416 U. S. 716-721.
(f) The Court of Appeals erred in concluding that § 718 was inapplicable to the petitioners' request for fees because there was no final order pending unresolved on appeal, since the language of § 718 is not to be read to mean that a fee award must be made chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
Page 416 U. S. 698
simultaneously with the entry of a desegregation order, and a district court must have discretion in a school desegregation case to award fees and costs incident to the final disposition of interim matters. Pp. 416 U. S. 721-723.
(g) Since the District Court made an allowance for services to January 29, 1971, when petitioners were not yet the "prevailing party" within the meaning of § 718, the fee award should be recomputed to April 5, 1971, or thereafter. Pp. 416 U. S. 723416 U. S. 723416 U. S. 723-724.