Frailich v. Zwerling, Schachter & Zwerling, LLP

MEMORANDUM

Zwerling, Schachter & Zwerling, LLP argues that the district court abused its discretion in declining to add a risk multiplier to the firm’s award of attorneys’ fees. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

In Fischel v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y of U.S., 307 F.3d 997 (9th Cir.2002), we held that a district court abuses its discretion in failing to apply a risk multiplier “when (1) attorneys take a case with the expectation that they will receive a risk enhancement if they prevail, (2) their hourly rate does not reflect that risk, and (3) there is evidence that the case was risky.” Id. at 1008; see also In re Wash. Pub. Power Supply Sys. Sec. Litig., 19 F.3d 1291, 1299-1304 (9th Cir.1994). Applied here, Fischel does not compel us to find an abuse of discretion. Although the district court made factual findings that the case (prior to settlement) was risky, there is no indication in the record that Zwerling Schachter took the case with the expectation that the firm would receive a risk enhancement or that the firm’s hourly rate did not reflect the risk. The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that a risk multiplier…