United States DC Circuit

In an action under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act seeking attorney's fees from a lawyer who, on behalf of a special needs student, initiated administrative proceedings that were eventually dismissed as moot, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where, because the district did not qualify as a prevailing party, it could not recover fees even if defendant continued to litigate inappropriately.

Appellate Information

• Argued 11/17/2009
• Decided 01/08/2010
• Published 01/08/2010

Judges

• Before GINSBURG, TATEL, and GRIFFITH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States DC Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Carl J. Schifferle, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs were Peter J. Nickles, Attorney General, Todd S. Kim, Solicitor General, and Donna M. Murasky, Deputy Solicitor General.


• For Appellees:
  
• Roxanne D. Neloms argued the cause for appellees. With her on the brief was Tilman L. Gerald., Arthur B. Spitzer, Caroline M. Brown, and Roger A. Ford were on the brief for amicus curiae the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area in support of appellees.