Hill

Hill v. Forest River, Inc.

Good Law
286 F. App'x 531
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 8, 2008No. 06-35863California482 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gerrine Hill appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for attorney fees and costs. Hill sued Forest River, his former employer, alleging that he was subjected to racial discrimination in the workplace. The parties eventually settled after Forest River submitted, and Hill accepted, an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68. We conclude that the district court was justified in withholding attorney fees and costs from Hill because of its determination that the parties had a mutual understanding that the Offer of Judgment was inclusive of such costs.

A district court’s decision to grant or deny attorney fees is generally reviewed for abuse of discretion, though any underlying findings of fact are reviewed for clear error, and any legal analysis is reviewed de novo. Thomas v. City of Tacoma, 410 F.3d 644 , 647 (9th Cir.2005) (citing Hall v. Bolger, 768 F.2d 1148 , 1150 (9th Cir.1985), and Fischer v. SJB-P.D. Inc., 214 F.3d 1115, 1118 (9th Cir.2000)). A prevailing plaintiff in a civil rights action “should ordinarily recover an attorney’s fee [under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 ] unless special circum *532 stances would render such an award…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.