Lummi Indian Tribe, Cross-Appellees v. Wesley C. Oltman, Cross-Appellants

The Lummi Indian Tribe filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 , alleging that the defendants had blocked tribal access to fishing grounds. The defendants counterclaimed under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 , 1982, and 1985.

After a settlement, both sides sought attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 , which the district court disallowed on the basis that neither party had prevailed.

The order denying fees reasoned that each party had received benefits and made concessions, and that the main benefit the plaintiffs received was narrowly circumscribed and burdened with assurances to the defendants.

Whether a party is a “prevailing party” for the purposes of § 1988 is a finding of fact that will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous. White v. City of Richmond, 713 F.2d 458, 460 (9th Cir.1983). We must reverse, however, if the district court used incorrect legal standards to reach this finding. See Rutherford v. Pitchess, 713 F.2d 1416, 1421-22 (9th Cir.1983). The Supreme Court and this circuit have clarified the meaning of § 1988 since the district court made its ruling. We find that these recent cases require a remand.

The district court denied attorney fees for two reasons.…