United States v. Brian Campbell

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 6142·291 F.3d 1169·2002 WL 1160624·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4793·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 10609
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 3, 200201-50167California1,137 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rawlinson, J.

Brian Campbell (“Campbell”) appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for the award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Hyde Amendment. Campbell argues that the district court abused its discretion in ruling that Campbell was not a “prevailing party” and failed to establish that the government acted in “bad faith.”

STANDARD OF REVIEW

“[Djenial of a motion for attorney’s fees under the Hyde Amendment is reviewed for abuse of discretion.” United States v. Tucor Int'l., Inc., 238 F.3d 1171 , 1175 (9th Cir.2001) (citing United States v. Lindberg, 220 F.3d 1120, 1124 (9th Cir.2000)). We can reverse only if we have “a definite and firm conviction that the district court committed a clear error of judgment.” Id. “The district court abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law, or bases its conclusion on a clearly erroneous finding of fact.” Id. (citations omitted).

BACKGROUND

Campbell, a personal injury attorney licensed to practice law in California, was indicted for various counts of mail fraud. The indictment alleged that Campbell and his wife participated in a scheme to “defraud automobile insurance companies by means of false and fraudulent pretenses _”…

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.