Environmental Protection Information Center v. Pacific Lumber Co.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Defendant-Appellant Pacific Lumber Company (Pacific) appeals from the dis *629 trict court’s order awarding attorneys fees to Plaintiff-Appellee Environmental Protection Information Center, Inc. (Center). The district court had jurisdiction over Center’s motion for attorneys fees pursuant to 16 U.S.C. §§ 1540 (c) & (g) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 , and we have jurisdiction over Pacific’s timely filed appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by awarding attorneys’ fees to Center.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides that a district court “may award costs of litigation (including reasonable attorney ... fees) to any party, whenever the court determines such award is appropriate.” 16 U.S.C. § 1540 (g)(4). Attorneys fees are “appropriate” when granted to a party who achieved “some degree of success on the merits,” Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club, 463 U.S. 680, 694 , 103 S.Ct. 3274 , 77 L.Ed.2d 938 (1983), meaning that the party “succeeded] on any significant issue in litigation which achieves some of the benefit it sought in bringing suit,” LSO, Ltd. v. Stroh, 205 F.3d 1146, 1160 (9th Cir.2000) (internal citations,…