Hartunian
Hartunian v. Racusin
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
This is a consolidated appeal from two orders of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (McKibben, J.). In one appeal, the party who prevailed below, Michael Racusin, appeals from the district court’s May 30, 2003, refusal to award him prejudgment interest (the “Prejudgment Interest Order”). In the other appeals, Racusin and his former attorney, Aram Hartunian, cross-appeal from a June *701 9, 2003, award of attorney’s fees (the “Fee Award”). Familiarity with the relevant facts and procedural history is presumed. See Leroy’s Horse and Sports Place v. Racusin, 182 F.3d 926 (9th Cir.1999) (unpublished) (“Leroy’s I”); Leroy’s Horse and Sports Place v. Racusin, 21 Fed.Appx. 716 (9th Cir.2001) (unpublished) (“Leroy’s II”).
Florin v. Nationsbank of Georgia, N.A., 60 F.3d 1245 , 1246-47 (7th Cir.1995).
The Fee Award is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See Horphag Research Ltd. v. Pellegrini, 337 F.3d 1036, 1042 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1111 , 124 S.Ct. 1090 , 157 L.Ed.2d 900 (2004). A district court abuses its discretion when it applies an incorrect legal standard or makes clearly erroneous findings of fact. United States v.…