Lissner

Lissner v. United States Customs Service

Good Law
56 F. App'x 330
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 31, 2003No. 01-57199; D.C. No. CV-98-07438-ABCCalifornia563 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

James Lissner appeals the district court’s attorney’s fee award foüowing his successful suit against the United States Customs Service (“USCS”) under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and review the attorney’s fee award for abuse of discretion. See Fischer v. SJB-P.D., Inc., 214 F.3d 1115, 1118 (9th Cir.2000). We reverse.

The district court abused its discretion by (1) failing to award attorney’s fees for the preparation of Lissner’s initial motion for attorney’s fees and costs and (2) reducing Lissner’s attorney hours and büling rates without considering añ of the submitted evidence.

Lissner’s initial attorney’s fees motion, whüe unsuccessful, was a “necessary step to [his] ultimate victory ...” and thus his fees for that motion should be included in the ultimate attorney’s fee award. See Cobrales v. County of Los Angeles, 935 F.2d 1050, 1053 (9th Cir.1991). The USCS’s contention that Lissner could not have prevaüed in his initial attorney’s fees motion because he lost the underlying summary judgment motion is misplaced. At the time Lissner brought his motion, a complainant in a FOIA action was eligible for…

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.