Olson Ex Rel. Edmund C. Olson Trust No.2 v. Han Kamakani Phua
This text of 584 F. App'x 435 (Olson Ex Rel. Edmund C. Olson Trust No.2 v. Han Kamakani Phua) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Han Kamakani Phua and Abel Simeona Lui appeal pro se from the district court’s order granting the Edmund C. Olson Trust’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion an award of attorney’s fees, and *436 review de novo the underlying legal analysis. Tutor-Saliba Corp. v. City of Hailey, 452 F.3d 1055, 1059-60 (9th Cir.2006). We affirm.
Contrary to appellants’ contention, the Trust’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs was timely filed because it was filed before entry of judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(2)(B) (“Unless a statute or a court order provides otherwise, the motion [for attorney’s fees] must .. •. be filed no later than 14 days after the entry of judgment”); Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877, 889 (9th Cir.2000) (a Rule 54 motion for attorney’s fees is expressly conditioned on an entry of judgment).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
584 F. App'x 435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olson-ex-rel-edmund-c-olson-trust-no2-v-han-kamakani-phua-ca9-2014.