About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-191802 1 (1978-05-17)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadtoi0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 


                    UNITED STATES GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFIC -)
            tolWASHINGTON, D.C. 20548                        '<L       J.


OFFIC OF GENERAL COUNSEL                                      B-192$02


      Mr. Abu W. Sibal                                              i  r -
      General Counsel
      Equal fployment Opportunity

      WashIngton D.C. 20506

      Dear Mr. Slbal:

          We refer to your letter of April 26, 1978 (Re: File Z-2796944, In
      the Matter of              ), requestiug that the Comptroll  General
      certify for payment under the provisions of 31 U.S.C. § 724a, a compromise
      settlement in the amount of $4,500 for attorneys' fees agreed upon beten
      EEOC a4 I           p t  plaintiff, in an action brought under title VIl-
      the Civil Rights AMt of L64, as amended, _    v__     No. C-75-1085A
      (N.D.CA.).

          The facts and *ircumstances leading up to this proposed settlement
      are as follows:               0 a grade GS-13 attorney stationed in
      EEOC's Atlanta. Georgia Regioual Office, filed suit as indicated in the
      above-captioned action against the EEOC in 1975, alleging discrimination.
      EEOC entmred into A consent decree with        * Subsequentlv two other
      attoreys were promoted to grade GS-14 positions in           office.
      Thereupon, he brought a contempt action, vhich the District Court sus-
      tained and found that EE3C in its promotiou selection process had failed-
      to credit         with the constructive experience to which he vas
      entitled under the consent decree. By order 44ted October 26, 1977k
      the District Court required EEOC to promote         to grade GS-14
      retroactively to October 24, 1976, and awarded him attorneys' fees pur-
      suant to 42 U.S.C. § 20OOe-5(k)i or legal services performed on his
      behalf through July 7, 1977., In its Order, the Court further stated:

               Because of the pendency of an appeal. from the
          Court's order denying motions to intervene filed by
                  . . . _ and          the Court €pressly re-
          serves for future consideration all issues regarding
          Plaintiff's entitlement to attorney's feas for legal
          services readered in conuection vith the post-trial
          motions filed by                and         and their
          mulng appeals. Also reserved for future considera-
          tion Is Plaintiff's entitlement to attouey's fees for


As


El

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most