Feshbach

Feshbach v. Securities & Exchange Commission

Good Law
5 F. Supp. 2d 788·1998 WL 310790·1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8583
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 12, 1998C 95-4465 SICalifornia1,860 words

Opinion

Opinion

Illston, J.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES

On February 6,1998, the Court heard oral argument on plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees. Having considered the arguments of counsel and the papers submitted, the Court concludes that plaintiffs did not substantially prevail in this litigation, and hereby DENIES plaintiffs’ motion.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs are majority stock holders of Stockbridge Partners, Inc. Plaintiffs allege that although the SEC had no reason to believe that plaintiffs had engaged in illegal or improper conduct, the SEC investigated plaintiffs for years. Plaintiffs claim that the SEC investigation was “instigated solely to harm and discredit plaintiffs and their business and to provide support and cover for vested interests.” Pi’s Motion, 2:6-7.

In order to learn the details of the SEC investigation, in November of 1992 plaintiffs filed requests for information with the SEC pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). The SEC agreed to provide public documents, but informed plaintiffs that the remainder of the sought documents were being withheld because their disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with an ongoing law enforcement…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.