Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8688450
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Chaker v. Nathan Entersprises Corp.
No. 8688450 · Decided August 4, 2008
No. 8688450·Ninth Circuit · 2008·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
August 4, 2008
Citation
No. 8688450
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Nathan Enterprises Corporation appeals from the district court’s order denying its motion for attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party in the underlying action brought by Darren D. Chaker alleging violations of the Fail- Credit Reporting Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Barios v. Cal. Interscholastic Fed’n, 277 F.3d 1128, 1133 (9th Cir.2002), and we vacate and remand. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the prevailing party is allowed to recover attorneys’ fees in relation to the work expended in responding to an unsuccessful pleading, motion, or other paper filed in bad faith or for purposes of harassment. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(c). Accordingly, we vacate the order denying attorneys’ fees and remand this matter for further proceedings in accordance with section 1681n(c). Appellant’s request for publication is denied. VACATED and REMANDED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Nathan Enterprises Corporation appeals from the district court’s order denying its motion for attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party in the underlying action brought by Darren D.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Nathan Enterprises Corporation appeals from the district court’s order denying its motion for attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party in the underlying action brought by Darren D.
02Chaker alleging violations of the Fail- Credit Reporting Act.
03Interscholastic Fed’n, 277 F.3d 1128, 1133 (9th Cir.2002), and we vacate and remand.
04Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the prevailing party is allowed to recover attorneys’ fees in relation to the work expended in responding to an unsuccessful pleading, motion, or other paper filed in bad faith or for purposes of harassm
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Nathan Enterprises Corporation appeals from the district court’s order denying its motion for attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party in the underlying action brought by Darren D.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Chaker v. Nathan Entersprises Corp. in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on August 4, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8688450 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.