Document: 491 U.S. 754 109 S.Ct. 2732 105 L.Ed.2d 639 INDEPENDENT FEDERATION OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, Petitionerv.Anne B. ZIPES et al. No. 88-608. Argued April 25, 1989. Decided June 22, Syllabus After protracted litigation, respondents, a class of female flight attendants alleging that Trans World Airlines' policy dismissing who became mothers constituted sex discrimination in violation Title VII the Civil Rights Act 1964, entered into settlement agreement with TWA which airline agreed, inter alia, to credit members full company and union "competitive" seniority. At this point, petitioner, collective-bargaining agent for attendants, intervened lawsuit on behalf incumbent would be adversely affected by conferral seniority, challenging grounds (1) court lacked jurisdiction award equitable relief one subclasses (2) terms violate existing agreement. challenge was rejected, respondents petitioned District Court an attorney's fees against petitioner under § 706(k) Act. The awarded Appeals affirmed. Held: courts may those are not charged violations but intervene protect their own rights only where intervention is frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation. Assessing blameless intervenors essential 706(k)'s central purpose providing victims wrongful incentive file suit. prospect uncompensated litigation such persons exists any event, since they choose attack decree collaterally instead intervening—an undesirable result rule urge foster. While petitioner's advocacy its members' bargained-for specific type conduct intended encourage, neither it statute aimed deter. Pp. 758-766. 846 F.2d 434 (CA 7 1988), reve sed remanded. SCALIA, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, filed concurring judgment, post, p. 766. MARSHALL, dissenting opinion, BRENNAN, joined, 770. STEVENS, took no part consideration decision case. Steven A. Fehr, petitioner. Aram Hartunian, Chicago, Ill., respondents. Justice SCALIA Court. 1 Section 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(k), provides relevant "court, discretion, allow prevailing party, other than [Equal Employment Opportunity] Commission United States, reasonable fee as costs." In case we must determine what circumstances permits have been found violated federal law. 2 * This controversy began 1970 when Airlines, brought action claiming terminating 2000e seq. Respondents were represented predecessor union, Air Line Stewards Stewardesses Association (ALSSA). Soon after suit filed, abandoned challenged ALSSA. approved dissatisfied certain appealed. Discerning potential conflict between ALSSA's obligations reversed Court's judgment ordered ALSSA replaced representative respondents' class. Assn., Local 550, TWU, AFL-CIO v. American Lines, Inc., 490 636, 643 (CA7 1973). On remand granted summary merits. affirmed determination TWA's VII. re Consolidated Pretrial Proceedings Airline Cases, 582 1142, 1144 1978). However, holding timely filing charges Equal Opportunity (EEOC) jurisdictional prerequisite court, went find over 90% claims ground jurisdictionally barred. Id., at 1149-1150. Both parties petitions certiorari; request deferred pending outcome ongoing negotiations. Sub nom. Zipes 442 916, 99 2834, 61 282 (1979). again reached settlement, agreed establish $3 million fund benefit all seniority from date termination.1 3 point had sought permission hired termination employment. Petitioner objected proposed two grounds: first, jurisdictio approve time-barred (designated "Subclass B"); second, reinstatement retroactive TWA. permitted rejected objections, approving respects. 550 630 1164 1980). then petition certiorari, raising essentially same objections pressed lower courts. consolidated earlier deferred. 455 385, 393, 102 1127, 1132, 71 234 (1982), timeliness requirement VII, 2000e-5(c), thus even Subclass We also second agreement, concluding competitive remedy authorized appropriate U.S., 398-400, S.Ct., 1135-1136. 4 To come, finally, aspect lengthy giving rise issues now before us: Respondents' attorneys 2000e-5(k). held "[u]nsuccessful are, like unsuccessful defendants, consistently responsible attorneys' fees," 640 F.Supp. 861, 867 (ND Ill.1986), total $180,915.84 petitioner—in addition approximately $1.25 fund. A divided panel (1988). union's 488 1029, 835, 968 (1989). II 5 Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. Wilderness Society, 421 240, 95 1612, 44 141 (1975), reaffirmed has come known "American Rule." Put simply, "[i]n litigant ordinarily entitled collect loser." 247, 1616. issue congressionally created exceptions rule. As Pub.L. 88-352, Tit. 78 Stat. 253, Congress enacted 706(k), district "in [EEOC] fee." Although text provision does specify limits upon courts' discretion disallow fees, system laws rarely limits. fee-shifting statutes,2 just regarding remedies, "the large objectives" Act, Albemarle Paper Moody, 422 405, 416, 2362, 2371, 45 280 embrace "equitable considerations," Christiansburg Garment EEOC, 412, 418, 98 694, 698, 54 648 (1978). Thus, Newman Piggie Park Enterprises, 390 400, 402, 88 964, 966, 19 1263 (1968), 20 (b) 2000a-3(b), plaintiff should "ordinarily recover unless special render unjust." thought constraint necessary carry out Congress' intention individuals injured racial act " 'private attorney[s] general,' vindicating considered highest priority." 966. See Co., supra, 415, 2370 (applying standard 706(k)); Northcross Memphis Bd. Education, 412 427, 428, 93 2201, 2202, 37 48 (1973) 718 Emergency School Aid, 1617). 6 Similarly, Garment, though term "prevailing party" distinguish plaintiffs principle applied defendant. Unlike plaintiff, reasoned, defendant 'the chosen instrument Congress,' 699, quoting Newman, 966; unlike losing defendant, "a violator law," 699. however, plaintiff's argument sound exercise Rule, if bad faith. Such unequal disposition, thought, "giving private substantial incentives sue, while foreclosing possibility recovering his expenses resisting groundless he can show faith," so "distort" "fair adversary process" could lightly assumed it. 419, concluded whose good faith, "upon finding foundation," id., 421, 700. dissent contends construing fashion competing equities taken account "ignore[s] express language," 771, ways: because party mentioned party,' thus, "when decides whether guided first foremost interests party," ibid. seems us something less "express language" argument—and non sequitur. say gets party's always determining whethe them. case, discussed above, decided long ago some trump latter cannot obtain fees. supra. respect ignore fail give effect "hostility categorical rules supposedly enshrined language allow" (emphasis added) fee. already described how law general, particular, interpret grant eliminate "categorical rules."3 absence merely "may" plaintiff; 700, frivolous prescriptions cases "categorical" set forth today. 8 Proceeding, then, light normally takes account, conclude similarly intervenors' It course true vindicate national encouraging make wrongdoers pay law—assuring suits will reduced consume recovery. 401-402, 965-966. intervenors, purpose. every there committed legal wrong. That will, liable expended litigating claim him, liability alone creates added sue. present example, paid attorneys. argue presence litigate compensation. clear consequence follow. Our Martin Wilks, 755, 762-763, 2180, 2184-2185, 104 835 (1989), establishes need collaterally—in original defending basis routinely recovered still face compensation fruits victory secure. 9 But inability generally did create marginal disincentive suits, w uld weigh considerations, Garment. Foremost among these fact that, contrast defendants presumptively anyone's civil rights. 698. bore responsibility practice alleged employees. Awarding intervenor further general whole whom nor VII's aim deterring employers engaging discriminatory practices. 10 emphasized crucial connection statutes. Kentucky Graham, 473 159, 3099, 87 114 (1985), 1983 police officers individual capacities, constitutional settling officers, officers' employer, Commonwealth Kentucky, 1988. rejecting claim, stated: 11 "Section 1988 many words define bear costs. Nonetheless, logical place look recovery party—the legally costs . clearly 1988." 164, 3104. 12 165, 3104 ("[L]iability merits go hand hand"); 168, 3106 ("[F]ee runs liability"); ("Section simply nonexistent"); 171, 3108 run together"). Cf. Supreme Virginia Consumers Union 446 719, 738, 100 1967, 1977, 64 641 (1980) (holding recoverable immune liability). distinguished related area constraints remedies. See, e.g., Ford Motor 458 219, 239-240, 3057, 3069-3070, 73 721 (1982); General Building Contractors Inc. Pennsylvania, 375, 399-400, 3141, 3154-3155, (1982). 13 innocent non-Title not, plaintiffs, instrument[s] Congress," disfavored participants proceedings.4 An sort here particularly welcome, stressed necessity protecting, legitimate expectations employees wrongdoing," Teamsters 431 324, 372, 97 1843, 1873, 52 396 (1977). Even regard allegedly lawbreaking wished process, see disproportionate advantage entitlement. Moreover, establishing one-way foster piecemeal complex con roversies—a strongly disfavored. 768, 2183. Adopting regime respondents—that take alternative becoming independent lawsuits attacking provisions shielded liability—would encourage interested await entry remedial schemes. serve one: intervenors. 14 Intervention faith definition means prolonging rather protecting rights—ranging contract-based rights, see, Richardson Alaska 750 763 (CA9 1984) (collective-bargaining agreement), statutory Prate Freedman, 583 (CA2 1978) (Title VII), Reeves Harrell, 791 1481 (CA11 1986) (Equal Protection Clause); Grano Barry, 251 U.S.App.D.C. 289, 783 1104 (1986) (Takings Clause)—which asserted subject assert collectively bargained contract employees, interest Just Term recognized rights—the petitioner—are most important ingredients attendants' agreements. Flight Attendants, 489 426, 428-430, 1225, 1228, 103 456 (1989) (slip op. 1-2). labor good-faith vital certainly 15 Of course, sometimes raise brings question appropriateness very entitlement relief. Here, advanced prevented approval B advance mean treated alike purposes assessments. remains litigated (and lost) avoid prevent bargaining away order settle entitled, litigant, pursue end through arguments scope hardly congressional favor "vigorous" proceedings, require disguise strongest escape often quite difficult separate directed existence extent past violations, making turn distinction our admonition major litigation." Hensley Eckerhart, 461 424, 437, S.Ct.1933, 1941, 76 40 (1983). 16 17 Because below incorrectly presumed accordingly made inquiry foundation, reversed, remanded proceedings consistent opinion. 18 ordered. STEVENS judgment. 21 For me, approach problem intervenor's fully satisfying. notes culpable wrongdoer, holds result, prevails intervenor. acknowledges "innocent claims" enforcing antidiscrimination policies Ante, 763, I agree each observations. 22 Despite fact, view, today fashions ignores difference. additional cost third-party lacks resources 23 fair necessary. me step toward solving recognize unsettle third itself injuries. states "defendant him," ante, 761 added)—and thereby tacitly assumes defendant's goes further. assumption. Addressing adjusting parts social remedying violat on. cost, well her existed nothing precedents foreclose turning reimbursement obtaining remedy, including assuring dealt fairly. 24 enters defend prevails, intervention, my borne safeguard enforce recouped, invite parties, concerns addressed fairly efficiently proceeding. 25 never interpreted full-scale departure assure maintain position nonetheless "groundless." apply intervenor, plaintiff. adjustment implicated interests, seeks interests. shift "frivolous, foundation." There reason why assertions self-restraint 26 "disadvantage" adopt diminish, extent, gains reap settlement: rule, cease deter settlements, however: unfairly impose parties. 27 examination considerations enter explains so. framing offer considers exposure event trial, discounts likelihood prevail. aspects package employer's expense—e.g., backpay—the likely reflect considerations. little similar calculation elements burden Indeed, share reason, reasonably serves needs might fall short reasonableness view rational party. 28 Under adopt, consider agreement's fairness factor opposition reasonable. therefore acquiesce proposal assesses oppose across board expose liability. And proposal, lest assessed object unfair view. desirable reject propose. 29 Accordingly, concur reverse proceedings. do join insofar requires intervention-related needlessly burdens imposed unlawful compromises furthering enforcement 30 followed unreasonable. If concluded, sufficient merit bar assessment it, whether, posture preserved and, so, governs award. due intervention. 31 BRENNAN joins, dissenting. 32 Nearly decades ago, Airlines (TWA) airline's mothers, retaining male counterparts fathers. almost years comprehensive settlement. Independent Federation Attendants (IFFA) untimely deprived relief; IFFA's members. spent nearly three $200,000 successfully Seventh Circuit, 398-399, 1135-1136, prevailed IFFA, IFFA solely forcing them invest time money majority practically 1964 (Act), IFFA. both objectives dissent. 33 begins proceeds language. attorney' detailed awarded, things clear. First, party." Texas State Teachers Assn. Garland Dist., 782, 790, 1486, 1492, 866 ("Congress contemplated awards available matter .") (internal quotations omitted); Charles Daley, 1057, 1064 1988) (civil statutes "fashion parameters eligibility awards, fix precision bounds awards") original). Second, contains "permissive discretionary (1978), reflecting hostility 34 overlooks textual directives. doubt challenges Disregarding focus success decrees propriety turns motivations matters worse, explicit courts, absolute circumstances, treat purposes.1 unfettered free limitations. Rather, principles articulate guide court's awarding 416-417, 2370-2371, (1975). Regrettably, limitations formulated kind. 35 embodies commitment eradicate discrimination. "to 761, more broadly whole. 2372. Given scarcity public enforcement, 'a priority.' Enterprises (1968). lack retain counsel, frequently unable attract lawyers contingency seek injunctive pecuniary damages. S.Rep. 94-1011, pp. 1-4 (1976); H.R.Rep. 94-1558, 1-3 (1976), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1976, 5908; Note, Promoting Vindication Through Attorney's Fees Awards 80 Colum.L.Rev. 346, 350-351 (1980). ensure bring provide victorious compensatory Nothing legislative history indicates limit types awarded. given broad goals, errs casually presuming exist.2 36 majority's contention ruling discourage bringing "create disincentive," 762, hard seriously. real person causing financial expenditures respond to, defeat, raised support remedy. force spend scarce relief, named conceded Geier Richardson, 871 1310, 1313 (CA6 1989) (United litigation); Akron Center Reproductive Health Akron, 604 1268, 1272 Ohio (individuals abortion ordinance implicate documents, least required responses plaintiffs); Vulcan Society Westchester Fire Dept. White Plains, 533 1054, 1062 (SDNY 1982) (union moved dissolve temporary restraining plaintiffs). By denying opportunity compensated breaks promise efforts Sullivan Hudson, 877, 2248, 941 (right extends work performed administrative judicial proceedings).3 "all sue." added). apparently believes typical victim income, possibly running hundreds thousands dollars, counter claims. access resources, Or perhaps assuming initial cover whatever incurred, incurred responding hours plaintiffs' reaching notion compensate subsequent presumes reasonable, far excess amount warranted. 38 justify contrary offers propositions: fees; plaintiffs. Neither assertion withstands scrutiny. Nor either explain adopted blanket 39 absent contrary, expressly authority caused injury. Maher Gagne, 448 122, 129, 2570, 2575, 65 653 ("Nothing conditions power violated").4 suggestion stems misreading several precedents. explained considerations" warrant prevails—compensating laws, assessing "against law"—are "wholly absent" reads mandating satisfied imposed. plainly demonstrates precondition fees.5 41 likewise Graham sued personal capacity result. Relying Eleventh Amendment, dismissed refused expenses. ultimately authorize "ha[d] against." vicarious nonparty actively participated litigation. situation voluntarily opposed liability.6 (1980), proposition Union, absolved acting promulgated regulations, enjoyed common-law immunity. 738-739, 1977-1978. Virginia, enjo immunity warranting exemption liability.7 43 Aside unpersuasive conditioned wrongdoing, attempts adopts directing Whatever validity treatment raises absolutely justification where, asserts non-civil-rights all.8 failure differentiate squared interpretation asserting importance With "are suit." 765. issue, equal respect, beyond Court.9 concedes, "intervenors Congress.' suggests, "that respondents," 765-766, instruments Congress" rush contributed struggle achieve leaves behind themselves, reversing priorities. critical pursuant prevailed, done should—and may—be Finally, today's decision. future, rely defenses, minimizing many, most, chance Without hope forced forgo resources. injuries unredressed unredeemed. "Competitive status" used allocate entitlements benefits employees," Franks Bowman Transportation 424 747, 766, 96 1251, 1265, 47 444 "benefit" compute noncompetitive earned employment," substantially 204(b) 1988, 1933, stated statutes' strong indication" alike. (1973). Hanrahan Hampton, 754, 758, n. 4, 1987, 1989, 670 (noting patterned Hensley, 433, 7, 1939, standards language). dissent, 772, 1, distorts States Monsanto, 600, 613, 2657, 2665, 512 describing "conclud[ing] construction transforms word 'may' 'may not' impermissibly frustrates intent." What said transformed "may not" frustrate intent. repeatedly implies intermeddlers get way tidy agreements wrongdoers. 770, 774, 775, 777, 778, 779. characterization understandable themselves lawsuit; not. infra, dismisses people, intermeddlers, dissenters established judge-made ranking authorizing prevail others. difference us. Whereas think fee-award account," "must (so (1978)), criterion "respect VII," 772. Those respected. gives hegemony exist world. Here elsewhere, role reconcile account. When wishes sweep others today, not," substituting command mandated depart commonsense context. expected seeking formal labels response Senate Committee Judiciary noted: "In [civil] and/or plaintiff-intervenors. procedural cases, defendant-intervenors." 5912. cited approvingly pre-Alyeska 3, citing Sims Amos, 340 691 (MD Ala.) (per curiam ) (three-judge court), aff'd, 409 942, 290, 215 (1972) (affirming state legislators apportionment scheme). itself, barred Mineral Lands Leasing 1920, 185, statute, exception Rule. 263, 267-268, 1624, 1626-1627. pays lipservice guilty "judge-made rights." 764, 4. elevating plane undermines instruments" contrast, outside field showing injury underlying statute. Bank Holding Company Amendments 1970, 1975; Clayton 15. premised merits, understand ever Yet, applies "where 761. permitting limited implicitly recognizes able length assessments cause refrain intervening consent collateral actions specious. relies, silent action. intimation conclusory dicta worst notwithstanding liability, wait attack. directly defense action, 3B J. Moore Kennedy, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 24.16[4] (2d ed. 1987), help craft doing, avoids delay increased Where intends exclude specifically. excludes Government Fair Labor Standards 216(b) (authorizing "defendants" "employers"); 1968, 3612(c) "plaintiffs"). Some sole opposing Diamond Charles, 476 54, 106 1697, 90 (pediatrician threatened conduct); (same). instances, adequately views proceeding amicus curiae. decline option intervene, "their ability affect substance litigation," "fairly consequences," risk 1067 1988); Center, 1274. forgets, furthermore, (1977); Transp. (1976).

Category: 5