Sharon Suzuki v. George Yuen

This appeal is submitted without oral argument.

Our first consideration of an appeal in this case, Suzuki v. Yuen, 617 F.2d 173 (9th Cir. 1980), was brought by the state from a ruling that a Hawaii statute providing for psychiatric commitment was unconstitutional. This panel affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Appellants then moved the district court to grant attorneys’ fees for work done during and after the appeal. On their request for $17,071.00, the district court, 507 F.Supp. 819 , allowed $5,529.00.

Appellants argue that the district court abused its discretion in fixing that figure. The appellee argues that appellants should be barred from making their claim for fees in the district court because they failed to raise it on appeal and, alternatively, that even if the district court had jurisdiction, it did not abuse its discretion.

I. Proper Forum for Determining Appellate Attorneys’ Fees

Generally, the district court grants appellate attorneys’ fees after hearing evidence as to the worth of the services. Perkins v. Standard Oil Co., 399 U.S. 222, 223 , 90 S.Ct. 1989, 1990 , 26 L.Ed.2d 534 (1970). Our practice has been consistent with this rule, see, eg., Southeast…