Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Failure To Follow Local District Court Rule On Pre-Motion Meet And Confer Requirements Can Cost A Prevailing Plaintiff Or The Litigant’s Counsel The Right To Fees

Ninth Circuit Affirmed District Judge’s Denial Of Fees For Failure To Meet And Confer For Purposes Of Seeing If Fee Dispute Could Be Resolved.

               District court local rules have the “force of law.”  Prevailing plaintiff’s counsel learned that all too well, with his failure to follow one resulting in a complete denial of a fee request.

               In Atwood v. Thornell, No. 23-2247 (9^th Cir. Apr. 25, 2024) (unpublished memorandum opn.), a plaintiff prisoner successfully litigated under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act to secure accommodation of his religious practices in connection with his execution.  His counsel then moved for a recovery of attorney’s fees.  The district court denied fees altogether because the attorney failed to attest to the parties’ good faith efforts to meet and confer for purposes of resolving disputed issues under the fee motion or to the moving party’s good faith efforts to arrange such a conference, a requirement under a D. Ariz. Local Rule.   The Ninth Circuit affirmed, determining the local rule had the force of law and that the failure to comply with this threshold requirement blunted fee entitlement even though civil rights statutes are liberally construed in favor of fee grants.