Blind County Worker to Get Legal Fees for Jury Win in Bias Suit

A blind woman who convinced a jury that Montgomery County, Md., discriminated when it failed to transfer her to a new call center along with her co-workers is entitled to legal fees even though she was awarded no money and the county relented and moved her before being ordered to do so, the Fourth Circuit ruled Wednesday.

The decision involves “a narrow holding” on who is a “prevailing party” for purposes of awarding attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses under federal fee-shifting provisions like those that apply to the Rehabilitation Act, the court said.

The county was wrong that a U.S. Supreme Court case establishing that a party who fails to secure a judgment on the merits or court-ordered relief can’t be considered as having prevailed simply because her lawsuit caused a voluntary change in the defendant’s conduct, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit said.

Yasmin Reyazuddin’s case was different than Buckhannon Board & Care Home v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources and the other Supreme precedent cited by the county, the court said.

Reyazuddin actually secured a jury verdict in her favor and the trial court was entertaining her motion for equitable relief to force Montgomery County to move her to the new call center when the county “capitulated,” the court said.

That made her a prevailing party under 29 U.S.C. §794a(b) “because she proved her claim,” Judge Albert Diaz said.

And the county’s relenting to her transfer request “was key to the district court’s subsequent finding that the county reasonably accommodated” her as well as its denial of Reyazuddin’s bid for equitable relief, Diaz said.

Buckhannon rejected the “catalyst theory” for the recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs, the judge said.

Reyazuddin’s suit “would be a classic catalyst theory case” if she hadn’t proved the county engaged in disability discrimination when it refused to move her, or if the county had done so before a jury found in her favor, Diaz said.

She also wouldn’t have been entitled to a fees award if she hadn’t sought equitable relief in addition to money damages, because the jury awarded her $0 damages, the court said.

Judges Stephanie D. Thacker and Pamela A. Harris joined the opinion.

Brown Goldstein & Levy LLP and Tre Legal Practice represent Reyazuddin. The county attorney’s office represents Montgomery County.

The case is Reyazuddin v. Montgomery Cty., Md., 4th Cir., No. 19-02144, 2/24/21.