Opinion ID: 184923
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Documentation in Support of the Fee Award

Text: 14 Appellants contend that, contrary to the district court's finding, they had specifically requested permission to review the FDIC's time records; therefore, the district court abused its discretion in awarding attorneys' fees to the FDIC notwithstanding its failure to produce the records for their inspection. In response, the FDIC cites our statement in Bender I that it is within the discretion of the trial judge to decide what sort of proof, if any, is needed to determine what a reasonable fee would be, 127 F.3d at 64, and argues that the court therefore acted within its discretion in accepting the summaries of time records from the FDIC. 15 The law of this circuit is clear: the party challenging a fee award is entitled, upon request, to review the contemporaneous time records of the party seeking to recover attorneys' fees. See Ideal Electronic Sec. Co. v. International Fidelity Ins. Co., 129 F.3d 143, 151 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (Ideal is entitled to discover the information it requires to appraise the reasonableness of the amount of fees requested by IFIC ... so that it may present to the court any legitimate challenges to IFIC's claim.); see also National Ass'n of Concerned Veterans v. Secretary of Defense, 675 F.2d 1319, 1329 (D.C. Cir. 1982) ([T]he opponent is entitled to the information it requires to appraise the reasonableness of the fee requested and in order that it may present any legitimate challenges to the application to the District Court.). 16 Contrary to the FDIC's suggestion, this principle is not inconsistent with our statement in Bender I, which applies in situations where a party has not sought contemporaneous time records in challenging a fee request. In such cases, the district court may rely upon whatever evidence it considers sufficient to establish the reasonableness of fees. See Bender I, 127 F.3d at 64. In this case, although the district court mistakenly found that appellants had not requested the FDIC's time records, the Benders in fact had done so in their response to the FDIC's Motion to Determine Reasonable Attorney Fees. Accordingly, we vacate the award of attorneys' fees and direct the district court to order the FDIC to produce its contemporaneous time records for appellants' inspection.