Murphy v. Smith

Ct. of Appeals denied plaintiff-prisoner’s request for appellate attorney fees as prevailing party in defendants-prison officials’ appeal that challenged Dist. Ct.’s order that diverted under Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) only 10 percent of plaintiff’s damage award  to satisfy Dist. Ct.’s award of attorney fees to plaintiff, as well as denied defendants’ contention that state-law sovereign immunity barred plaintiff’s state-law battery claim. While plaintiff prevailed on sovereign immunity claim on appeal, he was not entitled to any appellate attorney fees as prevailing party as to either claim raised on appeal, since: (1) plaintiff did not prevail on PLRA claim, where Ct. of Appeals agreed with defendants that full 25 percent of plaintiff’s damages should be used to satisfy attorney fee award set by Dist. Ct.; (2) 42 USC section 1988(b) does not directly authorize attorney fees for pursuing successful state-law claims; and (3) defendants’ appeal on instant state law sovereign immunity claim did not threaten or relate to plaintiff’s success on his federal claims.