Opinion ID: 1463326
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: EPISD's Claim For Attorney's Fees

Text: EPISD also requests that we reverse the district court's dismissal of its suit for attorney's fees. The IDEA provides that a court may award reasonable attorneys' fees . . . to a prevailing party who is a . . . local educational agency against the attorney of a parent who files a complaint . . . that is frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation, or against the attorney of a parent who continued to litigate after the litigation clearly became frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(B)(i)(II) (emphasis added). A court may also award reasonable attorneys' fees . . . to a prevailing State educational agency or local educational agency against the attorney of a parent, or against the parent, if the parent's complaint or subsequent cause of action was presented for any improper purpose . . . . Id. § 1415(i)(3)(B)(i)(III) (emphasis added); see also Weber, supra note 10, at 29 (discussing these provisions). As such, prevailing party status is a predicate for an award of attorney's fees to EPISD. [16] Here, there is no indication that EPISD did prevail or would have prevailed on R.R.'s underlying request for educational relief. Indeed, EPISD's whole argument rests on the fact that it offered to provide R.R. all of his requested educational relief. Thus, even though EPISD has prevailed by successfully arguing for a reduction in R.R.'s fee award, EPISD has not prevailed in arguing that R.R. is not entitled to his requested educational relief. Thus, we cannot say that EPISD was the prevailing party such that it is entitled to attorney's fees under the IDEA. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal of EPISD's claim for attorney's fees.