Law Offices of Waukeen Q. McCoy: Trial Judge Susan Illston Denies Minorities After...

Law Offices of Waukeen Q. McCoy: Trial Judge Susan Illston Denies Minorities
After They Prevail at Trial Against Federal Express

SAN FRANCISCO, March 24 /PRNewswire/ -- On March 19, 2009, Federal Judge Susan
Illston of the Northern District of California denied minority plaintiffs who
prevailed at trial against Federal Express the ability to seek attorney's fees
from the company and sanctioned their attorney $25,000 for his conduct related
to the request for attorney's fees.

It has been over two years since three minority employees of Federal Express,
Pernell Evans (African American), Charlotte Boswell (African American), and
Edward Alvarado (Mexican American) won jury verdicts against the company for
discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation, respectively. Pernell
Evans was awarded $950,000 by a unanimous jury, Charlotte Boswell was awarded
$3,000,000 by a unanimous jury, and Edward Alvarado was awarded $500,000 by a
unanimous jury. Both Evans and Boswell were awarded punitive damages. "These
cases were the first time Judge Illston ever had a punitive damage award
issued in her courtroom and the jury considered punitive damages in three
consecutive trials," said Waukeen McCoy, an African American attorney with
offices in San Francisco, who represented all three Plaintiffs at trial.

"Boswell worked in an environment where her Caucasian supervisor forcibly
kissed her and withheld her paycheck, and conditioned receipt of the paycheck
on Boswell going on a date with him. Alvarado worked in an environment where
Hispanic employees where referred to as 'wet backs' by their Caucasian
manager. Evans was an exemplary employee who FedEx attempted to force out of
the company by changing his shift and giving him unfair disciplines after he
complained of discrimination. All three of these cases exemplify the
egregious discriminatory conduct going on at Federal Express which was done in
conscious disregard of my clients' rights."

However, over one year after the final jury verdict, Judge Illston would
disagree with McCoy and the jurors and significantly reduce the verdicts of
each of the three employees. Illston overturned Evans' race discrimination
verdict completely, and reduced Boswell's unanimous verdict from $3,000,000.00
to $850,000 (taking away $2,450,000.00) and reduced Alvarado's verdict to
$300,000.

Even more astonishing, Judge Illston, on March 19, 2009, ruled that FedEx does
not have to pay any of the Plaintiffs' statutory attorneys' fees related to
their pursuit of justice, which is contrary to law promulgated by the
legislature. Illston accused Plaintiffs' counsel Waukeen McCoy of
"misleading the Court and defendants into believing the fee petitions were
based on contemporaneous time records, which are inherently more reliable."
McCoy states that, "the ruling is arbitrary, capricious and contrary to law.
In fact, Defendant FedEx never accused McCoy of such conduct and never
believed that McCoy's Alvarado Petitions were based on contemporaneous time
records. I have cost FedEx over $60 million dollars in discrimination verdicts
and settlements over the past six years. This company wants to make sure
that its employees are no longer represented by my office. However, what the
public must know is that FedEx did not request the Court sanction me for
misleading them into believing the fee petitions were based on contemporaneous
records. In fact, FedEx said the exact opposite."

Specifically, FedEx, on April 13, 2007, stated immediately after McCoy's
filing in response to the fee petitions that: "there is no testimony as to how
the McCoy Firm determined the hours spent on Alvarado [Boswell or Evans] to
support a fee petition for Plaintiff Alvarado [Boswell or Evans] given that
this was a fourteen plaintiff case, and Alvarado's claims were severed for
trial over two years after the litigation was commenced in this Court...
Further, McCoy provides in his Declaration the methods he used to 'generate'
the McCoy Firm's time, implying that the McCoy Firm does not keep
contemporaneous time records." Yet Judge Illston found the exact opposite and
sanctioned McCoy $25,000, required him to pay Special Master Edward Swanson
over $20,000 in fees, and precluded the plaintiffs from receiving compensation
from FedEx for McCoy's attorneys fees.

McCoy stated that, "under the American Rule adhered to by federal courts and
the courts of this State, the prevailing litigant is ordinarily not entitled
to collect a reasonable attorney's fee from the loser. However, pursuant to
Title VII's fee shifting provision, which is an exception to the American
Rule, the losing party must pay a reasonable attorney's fee to the attorney
for the prevailing party. A need for the fee shifting provision exists to
level the playing field between the large corporations and the individual
plaintiff. The fact that the large corporation possesses greater resources and
means to oppose the individual blue-collar employee justifies the need for a
guaranteed fee to encourage attorneys to take on risky discrimination cases,
which usually have limited damages. A primary rationale for the fee shifting
provisions is to provide access to competent counsel for those who could not
otherwise afford it. The Courts have recognized that the availability of
attorney's fees would have the effect of encouraging plaintiffs to bring
meritorious claims that would not otherwise be economically feasible to bring
on a non-contingent fee basis. These goals are consistent with the United
States Constitution which provides that courts shall be open to every person
for redress of any injury."

McCoy stated: "I do not want this case to work as a disincentive for attorneys
who contemplate not taking these types of cases in fear of retaliation by the
Court system. I told my clients when I first met with them in 2002 that there
would be pitfalls in pursuing a large case (with multiple plaintiffs-24 in
this case) against a billion dollar corporation. I told my clients that this
was a high stakes game and that powers that be would be out to tear down our
credibility because we were minorities championing a cause. We anticipated
these attacks. My clients' verdicts were unique and extraordinary. My
clients, as most blue-collar employees, do not have the financial wherewithal
to fight against an unjust system for what can be anticipated to be over a
decade. I have been working without compensation on this case for the past
six years and I will continue to persevere and prove the naysayers wrong."

"There was no issue with my credibility when I was litigating these cases
prior to the substantial jury verdicts. My credibility became an issue once a
minority operated firm was rightfully due several million dollars in
attorney's fees on these cases, using the multiplier that the legislature has
promulgated. Again, let me put this in perspective and, contrary to the
Court's order, the amount of attorney's fees (loadstar amounts) requested in
the three cases were as follows: Alvarado $364,633, Evans $359,804, and
Boswell $356,182. I have been working these cases for more than six years
which means I would have averaged approximately $60,000 in fees each year
which was more than reasonable, if not extremely conservative, in a litigious
case like this. I believe in the judicial system and at some stage of these
proceedings the truth will prevail. We anticipated a fight and pitfalls when
we began this journey, but I must admit this has been extraordinary."

Waukeen McCoy is a prominent San Francisco civil rights attorney willing to
take on large corporate discrimination cases. McCoy served four years on the
City and County of San Francisco's Ethics Commission, appointed by the
Honorable Willie Brown Jr. He won one of the largest racial discrimination
suits in U.S. history, Carroll v. Interstate Brands Corporation (parent
company of Wonder Bread), which rendered a verdict for $133 million in August
of 2000. McCoy was also class counsel in the Federal Express class action
lawsuit, Satchell v. FedEx, which rendered a settlement in the amount of $55
million dollars in September 2007. McCoy also argued the landmark same-sex
marriage case ("In Re Marriage") before the Supreme Court of the State of
California in March of 2008 and was successful in promulgating marriage rights
for same-sex couples in California.

SOURCE Law Offices of Waukeen McCoy

Waukeen McCoy of Law Offices of Waukeen McCoy, +1-415-675-7705, fax,
+1-415-675-2530