Eversole

MEMORANDUM **

Darryl Eversole appeals the fee award in his Title III ADA suit against H.L. Palmer. We affirm the district court’s calculation of the lodestar figure, but reverse deductions from it.

I

Palmer questions Eversole’s right to proceed on two grounds, neither persuasive. First, Palmer did not waive his right to appeal. Shaver Transp. Co. v. Chamberlain, 399 F.2d 893 , 895 (9th Cir.1968) (holding that it is not inconsistent with a challenge to the adequacy of a judgment award to claim the partial relief granted by it). Second, the issue of prior notice is not properly before us, as Palmer failed to raise it in the district court and filed no cross-appeal in this court.

II

We cannot say that the district court abused its discretion in arriving at a reasonable lodestar figure in any of the respects asserted. The court gave reasons for finding excessive the number of hours that were billed given a straightforward case, and no authority requires it to identify individual tasks that should have been accomplished more quickly.

However, the court’s explanations for a 20% reduction from the lodestar figure are subsumed within its determination of a reasonable hourly rate for…