Church Holy Light of the Queen v. Eric Holder, Jr.

*458 MEMORANDUM *

Church of the Holy Light of the Queen et al. (“Church of the Holy Light”) appeal the district court’s denial of their request for attorney’s fees for work conducted on appeal. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C § 1291. We reverse and remand.

The district court held that the government violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“RFRA”) when it prohibited Church of the Holy Light’s ceremonial use of Daime tea under the Controlled Substances Act. The district court issued an injunction that enjoined the government from prohibiting or interfering with Church of the Holy Light’s religious use of Daime tea. The injunction also established guidelines for Church of the Holy Light’s importation, distribution, and use of Daime tea. The government filed an appeal challenging the breadth of the injunction and the district court’s finding that the government’s conduct violated the RFRA.

After the government filed the appeal, Church of the Holy Light engaged in extensive lobbying and negotiations to persuade the government to drop or limit its appeal. The government ultimately limited its appeal to challenging only the breadth of the injunction. We held that the…

dissenting:

The district court didn’t abuse its discretion by denying plaintiffs fees for work performed on the unsuccessful appeal. I would affirm.

This case is no different from the following hypothetical. Let’s say a plaintiff prevails at trial by winning an award of compensatory and punitive damages. The defendant challenges only the award of punitive damages on appeal and wins outright by getting the entire punitive damages award reversed. On remand, the plaintiff is still the prevailing party in the case as a whole, having secured a judgment in her favor for compensatory damages, which still stands. And the plaintiff would undoubtedly be entitled to an award of attorney’s fees for work performed in the trial court. But all would agree, I *460 assume, that the district court could permissibly deny fees for work performed on the unsuccessful appeal, since the appeal contributed nothing to the plaintiffs ultimate victory, and in fact resulted in the scope of the plaintiffs initial victory being cut back.

That’s precisely what happened here. Plaintiffs won in the district court and obtained an injunction of considerable breadth. On appeal, the government didn’t challenge…

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AUG 04 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

CHURCH OF THE HOLY LIGHT OF No. 13-35058

THE QUEEN; JONATHAN GOLDMAN,

individually and as Spiritual Leader of the D.C. No. 1:08-cv-03095-PA “Santo Daime Church”; JACQUELYN

PRESTIDGE; MARY ROW, M.D.;

MIRIAM RAMSEY; ALEXANDRA MEMORANDUM*

BLISS YEAGER; SCOTT FERGUSON,

members of the Santo Daime Church,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General; KARIN J. IMMERGUT, United States Attorney, District of Oregon; HENRY M. PAULSON, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Treasury,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Owen M. Panner, Senior District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted July 9, 2014 Portland, Oregon

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Before: PREGERSON, PAEZ, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Church of the Holy Light of the Queen et al. (“Church of the Holy…