[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-413488-105":59,"doc-detail-413488-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","high-court-bans-attorneys-fee-awards-for-many-civil-rights-proceedings-vol14-no213","HIGH COURT BANS ATTORNEYS' FEE AWARDS FOR MANY CIVIL RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS - Vol.14 No.213","","U.S. Supreme Court rulings limit fee awards in civil rights cases under the 1976 Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act. In North Carolina v. Crest Street Community Council, the Court reversed a fee award tied to an administrative settlement, interpreting the statute to allow attorney’s fees for administrative work only when proceedings are part of, or followed by, a lawsuit. The decision may reduce attorney-fee exposure for Title VI and Title IX defendants, while not changing Title VII cases where plaintiffs must start administratively.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":20,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/high-court-bans-attorneys-fee-awards-for-many-civil-rights-proceedings-vol14-no213/413488/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/high-court-bans-attorneys-fee-awards-for-many-civil-rights-proceedings-vol14-no213/413488.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Margaret","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-09","2026-09-28",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":39},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What did the U.S. Supreme Court rule regarding attorney’s fees in civil rights cases?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It issued a ruling that could free many colleges and universities from having to pay attorneys’ fees to plaintiffs who prevail, by limiting when fee awards apply under the 1976 Act.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How did the Court interpret the 1976 Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act in the Crest Street case?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The Court reasoned the statute means plaintiffs should win those fees for administrative-level work only in cases that eventually go to court.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Does the ruling affect all civil rights statutes equally, such as Title VII?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"No. The ruling likely does not affect suits under Title VII because Title VII requires plaintiffs to begin in administrative proceedings, where fees are already available.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},413488,1790695009,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":19,"category_name":20,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":39,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":34,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},137451207643,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Vol.14,No。213  \nWednesday,November 5,1986  \n# HIGH COURT BANS ATTORNEYS'FEE ANARDS FOR MANY CIVIL RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS\n\nThe U.S.Supreme Court yesterday issued a ruling that could free many collegesand universities from having to pay the attorneys'fees of plaintiffs who pre-vail in many civil rights suits against them.  \nThe ruling in North Carolina v.Crest Street Community Counc11(55 USLW 3048)reversed a fee award that followed an administrative settlement in a bias suitunder Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,which forbids bias based on race,color or national origin in federally assisted programs or activities.  \nThe case concerned the 1976 Civi1 Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act,which letscourts order defendants to pay winning plaintiffs'legal fees in several typesof civil rights case,including Title VI cases,In a 6-3 ruling,the Courtreasoned that the fee award statute meant plaintiffs to win those fees foradministrative-level work only in cases that eventually went to court.  \nCrest Street could benefit colleges and universities that resolve complaints inadministratfve proceedings involving Title VI and other civil rights laws,in-cluding Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments,which forbids sex bias infederally funded education programs.  \nThe fees law says,\"In any action or proceeding to enforce\"those civil rightslaws,the court“may allow the prevalling party …a reasonable attorney'sfee.\"  \nClear IntentThe fees law,including its legislative history,\"clearlyenvisions that attorney's fees would be awarded for proceedings only when thoseproceedings are part of or followed by a lawsuit,\"Justice Sandra Day O'Connorwrote for the majority.  \nIf the case does end up in court,though,the ruling implies that fees can beawarded for the administrative proceedings.Because plaintiffs are not re-quired to first try administrative solutions in Title VI and Title IX casesbefore going to court,it had not been clear whether they were eligible to wintheir legal fees for administrative work,one lawyer said.  \nThe ruling probably does not affect suits under Title VII of the Civil RightsAct,which bars job discrimination.Because Title VII requires plaintiffs tobegin in administrative proceedings,fees are available for work at that level.  \nIn the dissent,Justice William Brennan said that in civil rights actions such(more)  \n6  \n# HIGH COURT BANS FEE AWARDS FOR MANY CIVIL RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS(Cont.)\n\nas Title VI and Title IX,in which plaintiffs may go straight to court,CrestStreet \"ensures …that no challenge brought under [the Civil Rights Attor-ney's Fees Awards Act]will ever be settled without a court action.\"  \nBut O'Connor said the ruling“creates a legitimate incentive for potentialcivil rights defendants to resolve disputes expeditiously,rather than risk theattorney's fees liability connected to civil rights litigation.”--Maggie Hume  \n# ED FUNDS SIX RESEARCH PROJECTS ON STUDENT LEARNING IN COLLEGE\n\nThe Education Department's Office of Educational Research and Improvement hasawarded more than $800,000 in contracts for research on student learning incollege.  \nThe largest of the awards,announced last week,is a $484,000 grant to IowaState University in Ames to study patterns of course-taking by four-year stu-dents,and how they affect academic achievement.  \nThe three-year study will examine transcripts of 1,500 seniors in five collegesand will use the Graduate Record General Examination to measure the students'academic abilities.  \nThe project“addresses a basic question that hasn't been studied on this largea scale:how students'choice of course affects their overall achievement,\"OERI Assistant Secretary Chester Finn said in a statement accompanying theawards notice.  \n\"The findings should help colleges and universities to examine their data onstudent backgrounds,coursework and achievement.They can use this informa-tion to assss the effectiveness of their programs and to advise students ontheir course selection.\"  \nThe Iowa State proposal was one","cbCaic1mhIsbEDAs","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaic1mhIsbEDAs","pdf",1724996,"English","# HIGH COURT BANS ATTORNEYS' FEE ANARDS FOR MANY CIVIL RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS\n## HIGH COURT BANS FEE AWARDS FOR MANY CIVIL RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS (Cont.)\n# ED FUNDS SIX RESEARCH PROJECTS ON STUDENT LEARNING IN COLLEGE","[{\"question\":\"What did the U.S. Supreme Court rule regarding attorney’s fees in civil rights cases?\",\"answer\":\"It issued a ruling that could free many colleges and universities from having to pay attorneys’ fees to plaintiffs who prevail, by limiting when fee awards apply under the 1976 Act.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the Court interpret the 1976 Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act in the Crest Street case?\",\"answer\":\"The Court reasoned the statute means plaintiffs should win those fees for administrative-level work only in cases that eventually go to court.\"},{\"question\":\"Does the ruling affect all civil rights statutes equally, such as Title VII?\",\"answer\":\"No. The ruling likely does not affect suits under Title VII because Title VII requires plaintiffs to begin in administrative proceedings, where fees are already available.\"}]","HIGH COURT BANS ATTORNEYS' FEE AWARDS FOR MANY CIVIL RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS - Vol.14 No.213 | PDF",1790594996,18]