About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-139703 1 (1978-03-02)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadtcq0001 and id is 1 raw text is: UNITED STATES GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE 0WASHINGTON, D.C. 20548 i |N R~EP-Y . o -139703 0FI CF oF GENERAL COUNSEL The Honorable Barbara Allen Babcock Assistant Attorney General Department Of 3ustice Dear Ms. Babcock: Reference is made to your January 31, 1978, letter (which we rec.ei.ived on February a) requestin our qomments on proposel Dep~atzeut of Jus- iLe guidelines for determining vhethe the Goverwrient should =ove for court costs (not including attorneys fees) wheu it successfully defends an employ- vent discrimination suit uuder Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of i9M'6, as axmended. The proposed guideliaes are based ou the opiaio- re-er i iu Y. __ _ - Civil Action No. 76-1411 (D.D.C. September I$, 1977). We support in principle the provulgation of gaidelines which would balance the competing interest9which exist when ixvin for costc in ay Title VII cases, as set out in your lettex. We also note at a-parent trend in the Federal dist ict court for the Distzict of Coltmbia iz awarding court costs to tho Goverinent as th e prevailing defendant in recent Title V1i case. See, __-- V. ________, Civil Actiou No. 13-0 1156 (D.D.C. August 23, 1977)0 V. Secretary of the 1avy, Civil Action i4o. 75-1883 ().DC. August 31, 1977); Rf. V.--- , supra. Rowever, we think that the language of your third factor-the presence or absence of bad faith on the part of the plaintilf-may be too restrictive in some cases. It night be preferable to adopt the staudard applied by the Supreme Court in Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal mployment Opportunity Comuission, 46 U.S.L.W. 4105 (1973), in which the Court he1d that a district court may award attorneys fees to a prevailiag Title VII defendant upon a finding that tho plaintiff's action was frivolous, unreasonable or without foundation, even though not brought in subjective bad faith. Chriatansburg, of course, involved a private defendant and attorzny3 fees, rather than costs, but it would seem a fortiori to be ar approprizate standard for the awarding of costs. 'We think the Christiansburg standard would adequately acomplish the Goveruneut's purposes without diaccuraging legitimate or even debatable Title V1I claima. We realize that the LCrletinaburg stan&r- ard is reflected to some extent in the fifth factor (the closeness of the decision), but suspect that it %&y tend to becoue overshadowed by the

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:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most