Virginia Espinoza Guerrero Marcos Albert Guerrero v. William Cummings City of Nyssa

Good Law
70 F.3d 1111·95 Daily Journal DAR 16197·1995 WL 716874·33 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 671·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 34228
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 7, 199593-36065California1,326 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rymer, J.

Virginia Espinoza Guerrero and Marcos Guerrero appeal the district court’s orders denying them “fees on fees” for work done by their attorney after they accepted Fed. R.Civ.P. 68 offers of judgment that provided for reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred “prior to the date of’ the offers. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I

The Guerreros brought a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against William Cummings and the City of Nyssa. Cummings and Nyssa made Rule 68 offers of judgment prior to the commencement of trial. Except for the dollar amounts and the plaintiffs’ names, the offers were identical and provided:

The Guerreros accepted, and judgment was entered in their favor.

Their attorney then sought to recover costs and fees that included time spent in preparing the bill. The district court awarded pre-settlement costs and fees, but declined to award fees on fees on the ground that “the explicit terms of the offers dictate this result.”

II

The Guerreros contend that the terms of the offers they accepted do not clearly and unambiguously waive fees on fees. We cannot agree.

As a general rule, “time spent in establishing entitlement to an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.