Porter v. Winter

Filed May 5, 2010
Cite as 07-17120, CV 06-00880-LJO (Argued and Submitted September 17, 2009)
Ninth District Court of Appeals

Appeals Court Allows Discrimination Victim’s Claim to Recover Costs in EEOC Case

The issue arose from an employment case filed by Ronald Porter, a former civilian employee of the Navy, before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for alleged gender discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

After hearing, the EEOC had found the Navy liable for retaliation, but not gender discrimination. In addition, the Navy awarded him only a fraction of the amount he requested when Porter sought to recover the attorney’s fees and costs he incurred during the Title VII administrative proceedings.

The EEOC later increased the award after reviewing the Navy’s decision but Porter was not satisfied.

As a result, Porter filed a complaint in the district court to challenge the amount of attorney’s fees awarded to him.

The district court however dismissed the complaint on the grounds that it did not have jurisdiction to “adjudicate a claim for attorney’s fees without substantive violation of Title VII”.

Porter appealed the decision of the district court.

During appeal, the Ninth District Court of Appeal reversed the decision, holding that the federal courts have “jurisdiction over claims brought solely to recover attorney’s fees incurred in administrative proceedings before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964”. (New York Gaslight Club, Inc. v. Carey, 447 U.S. 54 (1980)

Further, one of the appellate panel judges, Judge Stephen Reinhardt concluded that Porter did not need to claim a substantive civil rights violation to the challenge the fee award.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals therefore reversed the decision and revived Porter’s action to seek attorney’s fees for the EEOC administrative proceedings.