Belliveau
Belliveau v. Thomson Financial Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
The facts and procedural posture of this case are familiar to the parties and we do not repeat them here. Robert Biegler, counsel for plaintiff Raymond Belliveau, appeals the distinct court’s award of attorney’s fees in favor of Thomson Financial. Biegler argues that the distinct court erred by employing the incorrect standard— recklessness, rather than bad faith — in determining whether attorney’s fees were appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and by finding that his conduct was reckless.
Thomson Financial argues that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because Biegler’s notice of appeal was untimely. Though the notice of appeal contained an error, it was filed within thirty days of entry of judgment, as required by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a). See Klemm v. Astrue, 543 F.3d 1139, 1144 (9th Cir.2008) (holding that an “error-ridden” notice of appeal was timely filed when received by the district coui't within the period specified in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) because “[t]he defects in [the] notice of appeal could not possibly have obscured the nature of the filing”). We will therefore deem it as timely filed.