[Seattle ] Schools' legal fight could get more costly

[fortyfeetunder]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/321970_race30.html

"Seattle Public Schools, already stung from losing its long-running legal fight over voluntary desegregation measures, now faces a new trial: paying the seven-figure legal fees of the parents who sued the district.

Just one day after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the district cannot use a racial tiebreaker in determining school assignments, the parents' "pro bono" attorney indicated he will try to recover legal costs he estimates will be seven figures. "This stuff is expensive," attorney Harry Korrell, a partner at the Seattle law firm of Davis Wright Tremaine, said Friday. "There's no way to fight in federal court ... without racking up quite a legal bill."

District officials were caught off guard Friday but said they planned to fight what would amount to a significant financial hit. Pressing a public school district to pay more than $1 million in legal fees to a large law firm "is a little contrary to the idea that pro bono is for the public good," said Shannon McMinimee, an attorney for the district."

Here is my beef --
The money these so called "pro bono" lawyers want could be taken away from school funding, funds that can help the kids. The Seattle public schools demographics today is 60% minority.....Why in the hell don't they hold a fricking BAKE SALE to get their money back....

[Solo_in_MD]

1. When the ACLU wins a suit against a school disctrict, they get legal fees

You can't have it both ways...

[fortyfeetunder]

2. It's not the money, but the principle.

ACLU is a non-profit organization..

Davis, Wright and Tremaine is a for profit legal firm. I think they are not hurting as much as Seattle Public schools....

[Solo_in_MD]

3. So anytime someone sues the government using a law firm and wins, the gov should not have to pay

legal fees?

What about if the school district was clearly in the wrong?
What about if it was an ADA case the district lost?
So if its a starving solo practitioner fees are okay?

Last time I checked, there is no means testing for lawyers...

[fortyfeetunder]

5. Back to the principle.

First, I don't agree with the SCOTUS position.

DWT made it sound like oh, poor us we did this pro bono -- but since we won, so we are chucking the pro bono and recouping our legal fees.

The money is going to leave the school district, money that could be used for education and helping students. DWT in principle could ask for legal fees but return them to the community....but I guess that's asking too much of them.

[Solo_in_MD]

6. Actually you object to the specific instance due to the circumstances, not the principle of

recovering legal fees. I don't like this specific instance, but am unwilling to forgo it as a principle due to the overall good it does.

I could play devils advocate here and draw an analogy that says while we don't like sending children to school across town and assigning them based on race, its for the greater overall good. Its actually the same logic. Better Seattle pays up to preserve an important tool that the tool go away and with it all the good it does.

There is a chance the trial court will deny fees, but given precedent, Seattle will end up paying. There is no issue that they lost.

[Turbineguy]

4. At least they are not

wasting the money educating children!:sarcasm: