descrybe logo
You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Stevedoring Services of America Homeport Insurance Co. v. Arel Price Eagle Pacific Insurance Company Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, Arel Price v. Stevedoring Services of America Homeport Insurance Co. Eagle Pacific Insurance Company Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs

Citations: 432 F.3d 1112; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 146Docket: 02-71207

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; January 4, 2006; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals addresses Arel Price's application for attorney's fees and costs under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA). Price sought fees for legal work opposing his employer's petition for certiorari. The court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to grant these fees, as the work was not conducted 'before' the court as required by 33 U.S.C. § 928(c). Additionally, the court found Price's application untimely, having been filed beyond the 14-day deadline established by Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6, with no support for tolling under Supreme Court Rule 44.1. Moreover, Price's claim for costs was denied as 33 U.S.C. § 928(d) restricts costs to witness fees and mileage for prevailing claimants, and the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure are inapplicable for Supreme Court costs. Consequently, the court denied Price's application for fees and costs, leaving him responsible for his attorney's fees, contrary to the protective intent of the LHWCA.

Legal Issues Addressed

Entitlement to Costs under LHWCA

Application: The claimant is not entitled to costs as 33 U.S.C. § 928(d) limits cost recovery to witness fees and mileage, and the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure do not apply for costs incurred in the Supreme Court.

Reasoning: The court also clarifies that Price is not entitled to costs, as 33 U.S.C. § 928(d) only allows for costs related to witness fees and mileage for prevailing claimants, and the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure do not apply in this context for costs incurred in the Supreme Court.

Jurisdiction for Attorney's Fees under LHWCA

Application: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals lacks jurisdiction to award attorney's fees for work not performed 'before' it, as mandated by 33 U.S.C. § 928(c).

Reasoning: The court concludes it lacks jurisdiction to grant fees for opposing his employer's petition for certiorari, as the work was not performed 'before' this court, as required by 33 U.S.C. § 928(c).

Timeliness of Fee Application

Application: The fee application was deemed untimely as it was filed beyond the 14-day window set by Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6, and Supreme Court Rule 44.1 does not provide a basis for tolling the deadline.

Reasoning: Price filed his fee application on November 8, 2005, which is beyond the 14-day window set by Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6 following the Supreme Court's October 11 order.