Rea Paeste v. Government of Guam
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Guam and several of its officers in their official capacities (collectively, “Guam”) appeal from the district court’s orders awarding attorney’s fees and costs, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 , to plaintiffs Rea Mializa Paeste, Jeffrey Paeste, Sharon Za-panta, and Glenn Zapanta, on behalf of a class of Guam Taxpayers (collectively, “the Taxpayers”). We affirm.
1. In an opinion filed concurrently with this disposition, we hold that the Taxpayers had a valid claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .
2. The district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to reduce fees based on the Taxpayers’ submission of billing summaries. A prevailing party “can meet his burden ... by simply listing his hours and ‘identifying] the general subject matter of his time expenditures.’ ” Fischer v. SJB-P.D. Inc., 214 F.3d 1115, 1121 (9th Cir.2000) (alteration in original) (quoting Davis v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 976 F.2d 1536, 1542 (9th Cir.1992), opinion vacated in part on other grounds on denial of reh’g, 984 F.2d 345 (9th Cir.1993)). The Taxpayers’ “summary of the time spent on a broad category of tasks ... compiled from time slips” was sufficient to satisfy “this basic…