Legal Opinion
United States v. Brian Campbell
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 3, 2002No. 01-50167PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RAWLINSON, Circuit Judge.
Brian Campbell (“Campbell”) appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for the award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Hyde Amendment. Campbell argues that the district court abused its discretion in ruling that Campbell was not a “prevailing party” and failed to establish that the government acted in “bad faith.”
STANDARD OF REVIEW
“[Djenial of a motion for attorney’s fees under the Hyde Amendment is reviewed for abuse of discretion.” United States v. Tucor Int'l., Inc., 238 F.3d 1171, 1175 (9th Cir.2001) (citing United States v. Lindberg, 220 F.3d 1120,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- United States v. KnottCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- United States v. David T. BraunsteinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Erik LindbergCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Babatunde Nathaniel BeeksCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
3Cited by11 opinions
- United States v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- State of Idaho v. Coeur D'Alene TribeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Krishnaswami Sriram, Defendant-Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
- Steven Richardson v. Continental Grain Company Director, Office of Workers Compensation ProgramsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.