Chisholm v. Daniel

963 F.2d 378 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. David M. CHISHOLM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James R. DANIEL, Plan Administrator and Trustee; Pousto, Inc., dba Unitronic Stock Bonus Plan; Trust Consultants, Inc., a corporation; SCI Systems, Inc., a corporation, Defendants-Appellees. No. 89-16430. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted April 14, 1992. Decided May 15, 1992. Before GOODWIN, SCHROEDER and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 This is an appeal of an assessment "imposed jointly and severally against plaintiffs, [David] Chisholm and [Thomas] Hwang, 1 and their attorney, James Paul Green," of costs and attorneys' fees under section 1132(g)(1) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 . We reverse the award and remand for reconsideration of defendants' motion for costs and fees. 3 "[T]he circumstances under which attorneys' fees are to be awarded and the range of…