The following excerpt is from Herring v. Veterans Admin., 76 F.3d 386 (9th Cir. 1996):
Herring argues that the district court erred in granting Herring an attorney's fee award based on the number of claims on which she had prevailed. A court must determine a reasonable fee award in light of the degree of success obtained in the action. Farrar v. Hobby, 113 S.Ct. 566, 574-75 (1992). Here the district court was not merely mechanical in determining the award, it assessed the relative importance of each of Herring's claims, determined that the access and amendment claims, on which it believed Herring prevailed, were less important than the damages claims on which Herring did not prevail and awarded fees based on their relative importance. This finding was not clearly erroneous.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.