# Hall v. Cole

> Supreme Court of the United States · May 21, 1973 · 412 U.S. 1

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9425298

## Case

- **Full name:** HALL Et Al. v. COLE
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** May 21, 1973
- **Citations:** 412 U.S. 1; 3 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20552; 83 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2177; 93 S. Ct. 1943; 36 L. Ed. 2d 702; 1973 U.S. LEXIS 188
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by White
- **Judges:** Brennan, Burger, Douglas, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell, White, Rehnquist, Marshall
- **Cited by:** 1,056 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Yellow flag:** Disagreed with by Rodonich v. Senyshyn, 52 F.3d 28 (1995).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 1
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9425298

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding that “the dilatory action of the union and its officers” in expelling an individual from the union following his resolutions unsuccessfully condemning union management’s alleged undemocratic and short sighted policies constituted bad faith (internal quotation marks …
- holding that a union member's vindication of his right to free speech in the face of a restrictive union rule conferred benefits on the union and its members and was thus entitled to an award of attorneys' fees from the union treasury
- holding that the plaintiffs acted on behalf of all union members, and reimbursing the attorneys' fees from the union treasury, such that all union members in effect equally contributed to the costs of litigation
- stating in a case involving the common fund exception that "[i]t is clear ... that 'bad faith' may be found, not only in the actions that led to the lawsuit, but also in the conduct of the litigation.”
- holding that such awards are, “of course, punitive, and the essential element in triggering the award of fees is therefore the existence of ‘bad faith’ on the part of the unsuccessful litigant.”

## Opinion text

*16 Mr. Justice White,
with whom Mr. Justice Rehnquist joins, dissenting.
I would need a far clearer signal from Congress than we have here to permit awarding attorneys’ fees in member-union litigation, which so often involves private feuding having no general significance. The award of fees in the occasionally successful and meritorious case will not be worth the litigation the Court’s decision will invite and foster.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9425298. Public record. Not legal advice.