Stephen Yagman v. Joseph Edmondson

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 18 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEPHEN YAGMAN, No. 17-55384 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:15-cv-07210-DSF-SS v. MEMORANDUM* JOSEPH CURTIS EDMONDSON, Defendant, and MICHAEL J. COLELLO, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 15, 2018** Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Michael J. Colello appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). for attorney’s fees. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Graham–Sult v. Clainos, 756 F.3d 724, 751 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Colello’s motion for attorney’s fees under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16(c) because Colello failed to establish adequately the hours reasonably spent preparing the anti-SLAPP motion and a reasonable hourly rate for private attorneys in the community. See Ketchum v. Moses, 17 P.3d 735, 745 (Cal. 2001) (“A fee request that appears unreasonably inflated is a special circumstance permitting the trial court to reduce the award or deny one altogether.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). AFFIRMED. 2 17-55384