White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment Security

Background

Richard White, representing a class of people, sued the New Hampshire Department of Employment Security, a state agency, alleging delays in unemployment benefit decisions and seeking injunctive and declaratory relief. The District Court approved a consent decree in January 1979. White later sought attorney’s fees under the federal fee law (§1988). He filed a formal fee motion about four and one-half months after judgment, and the District Court awarded fees. The Court of Appeals reversed, saying Rule 59(e)’s 10‑day limit applied.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court considered whether a postjudgment fee request is a motion to alter the judgment under Rule 59(e). It explained that Rule 59(e) was meant for correcting mistakes in a court’s merits ruling soon after judgment, not for separate fee determinations. The Court held that §1988 fee questions are collateral to the main case because only a "prevailing party" can get fees and entitlement requires a separate inquiry. The Court reversed the First Circuit and said Rule 59(e) does not bar later fee requests.

Real world impact

This ruling lets prevailing plaintiffs in civil rights cases seek §1988 fees after the 10‑day Rule 59(e) window. District courts keep discretion to deny late fee requests if they unfairly surprise the other side, and they may adopt local rules setting time limits. The decision reduces pressure on lawyers to file fees with every interim order and aims to avoid unnecessary fee litigation tied to Rule 59(e).

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Blackmun agreed with the outcome but urged the Court to also decide whether Rules 54(d) and 58 apply to §1988 fee requests, preferring a clearer uniform rule.