ERISA, Civil Code Section, And Derivative Statute Could Not Support Fee Award. When it comes to a successful fee petition, first and foremost one generally must have a statutory or a contractual basis for fee entitlement. Failure to surmount this fundamental step means that a fee recovery will be reversed, as it was […]
Substantial Justification Issue By Government Left To Resolve On Remand. The Ninth Circuit, in Wood v. Burwell, No. 14-15356 (9th Cir. Sept. 14, 2016) (published) reversed and remanded a district judge’s denial of attorney’s fees to a prevailing class plaintiff under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Plaintiff represented class members who
Majority Found Appeal Notice Encompassed Fee Award, But Dissent Did Not Agree And Found Plaintiffs Did Not Provide Hourly Rate Evidence In The Right Time Period And For FOIA Cases. Hiken v. Department of Defense, No. 13-17073 (9th Cir. Sept. 6, 2016) (published) is a situation where magistrates, district judges, and the Ninth
$419,987.36 Fee Award/$34,768.71 Costs Award Gets Remanded For Another Look. In Ibrahim v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security, Nos. 14-16161/14-17272 (9th Cir. Aug. 30, 2016) (published), a plaintiff won a week-long bench trial in which the district judge determined that he was improperly placed on a terrorist/No-Fly List. Plaintiff then moved
Making Faces In Courtroom, Which Were Found Not To Be Made In Bad Faith, Was Not Sanctionable. Alice S. Kandell, photographer. May 1971. Library of Congress. The Ninth Circuit, in Hernandez (Boothe) v. City of Vancouver, No. 13-35131 (9th Cir. Aug. 9, 2016) (unpublished), reviewed a $145,765.43 sanctions award against a
17 U.S.C. § 505 Was At Issue—Objective Reasonableness Plus Other Factors Should Be Weighed. Justice Kagan, for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, clarified the factors to be weighed for purposes of discretionarily awarding attorney’s fees to a prevailing party under 17 U.S.C. § 505, the Copyright Act’s fee-shifting statute. In Kirtsaeng dba
Appellate Court Reverses Denial Of Section 128.5 Sanctions, But Affirms Fee Recovery To Plaintiff Under California Public Records Act. San Diegans For Open Government v. City of San Diego, Case No. D068421 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 7, 2016) (published) is a key decision on the timing, applicability, and scope of Code of
Postjudgment Fees Also Reversed, But Expert Witness Fees Sustained Based On Failure To Separate Appeal The Postjudgment Award. In Kayne v. Mense, Case No. B254975 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 25, 2016) (unpublished), defendants were found to have breached a fiduciary duty to plaintiff (giving rise to compensatory and punitive damages) and found
Fee Activities Were Not Within the Purview Of Either Statute. Debtor/employer eventually “defensed” a bankruptcy nondischargeability action brought by certain employees arguing employer was an ERISA fiduciary for purposes of the “fiduciary” exception to bankruptcy discharge, a determination found to not legally be sustainable under a prior Ninth Circuit opinion (meaning employer was
Interpretation of Retention Prompt Payment Statute At Issue. On December 5 and 18, we posted on the 2/1 DCA’s United Rigger decision, which among other things split company with another sister intermediate appellate court on the interpretation of the retention prompt payment statute and accordingly reversed a $150,000 fee award to the then
