United States Ninth Circuit

Denial of plaintiffs' motion for attorney fees and costs incurred in enforcing a judgment in their favor against defendants is affirmed where: 1) Rule 69(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure applies to a motion for post-judgment attorney fees; and 2) plaintiffs filed their post-judgment fee motion after the underlying judgment was fully satisfied, and thus, the motion was untimely.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/04/2007
• Published 06/04/2007

Judges

• HOLLAND, District Judge., Before:  PROCTER HUG, JR. and WILLIAM A. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and H. RUSSEL HOLLAND,District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• J.D. Sullivan and Ross S. Heckmann, Sullivan Law Offices, Minden, NV, for the appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Michael A. Zamani, pro se, San Jose, CA, argued on his own behalf.  Timothy E. Herr, Herr & Zapala, San Jose, CA, was on the brief for the appellees.