Evans v. Jeff D. Ex Rel. Johnson

1986-06-09

Headline: Civil-rights case allows courts to approve class-action settlements that waive attorney fees, reversing appeals court and making it easier for plaintiffs to accept broad injunctive relief without defendants paying lawyers.

Holding: The Court held that a district court may, in its discretion, approve a class-action consent decree that includes a waiver of statutorily authorized attorney’s fees and did not abuse that discretion in this case.

Real World Impact:

Lets class settlements include fee waivers if the court finds the deal fair
Gives district judges discretion to approve or reject fee-waiving settlements
May change bargaining and lawyers’ incentives in civil-rights cases

Topics: attorney fees, class-action settlements, civil rights enforcement, access to legal representation

Summary

Background

State officials in Idaho who run education and health services for emotionally and mentally handicapped children were sued by a class of such children represented by an Idaho Legal Aid attorney. The complaint sought injunctive reforms and asked for costs and fees but not money damages. Shortly before trial the State offered a consent decree giving the class substantial prospective relief but conditioned the deal on a waiver saying defendants would not pay attorneys’ fees or costs. The district court approved the settlement and denied a motion to present a fees bill. The Ninth Circuit invalidated the waiver and ordered the district court to fix fees; the Supreme Court granted review.

Reasoning

The Court framed the narrow question: must a district court reject a class settlement that conditions substantial relief on a waiver of statutory attorney’s fees under the Fees Act (42 U.S.C. §1988)? The majority held the statute does not categorically forbid such waivers. Congress made prevailing parties eligible for discretionary fees but did not outlaw negotiated waivers, and settlements can further civil-rights enforcement. The Court emphasized that district courts retain sound discretion to approve or reject class settlements, and on these facts the district court did not abuse that discretion in approving the fee waiver tied to significant injunctive relief.

Real world impact

Lower courts and parties may negotiate and approve class-action settlements that include fee waivers, so long as the court finds the overall deal fair to the class. District judges must evaluate settlements case by case, balancing the value of injunctive relief against the lost fee claim. Congress could still change the rule by statute.

Dissents or concurrances

The dissent argued waivers undermine Congress’s goal of attracting counsel for civil-rights cases and would make it harder for disadvantaged plaintiffs to find lawyers; it would bar waiver of the statutory “reasonable” fee.