Opinion ID: 1463326
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Fees for Work Performed Prior to the Resolution Meeting

Text: Finally, we review whether R.R. is entitled to attorney's fees for work his attorney performed prior to the resolution meeting. The IDEA states that a court shall reduce fees whenever the court finds that . . . the parent, or the parent's attorney . . . unreasonably protracted the final resolution of the controversy. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(F)(i). [13] As such, we must determine whether R.R.'s rejection of EPISD's settlement offer unreasonably protracted the final resolution of the controversy such that a further reduction in the fee award is warranted. [14] As discussed above, when a party rejects an offer of settlement and later achieves at an administrative or judicial proceeding no more than what was previously offered, a court may, but is not required to, award reasonable attorney's fees for work performed prior to the written offer of settlement under § 1415(i)(3)(D)(i). On the other hand, if a party accepts an offer of settlement, that party may not be the prevailing party and thus not be entitled to an award of attorney's fees. [15] We need not speculate about these alternate situations. Here, EPISD wisely included the payment of reasonable attorney's fees to R.R. as part of its settlement offer. Consequently, R.R. was offered all requested educational relief and reasonable attorney's fees, leaving absolutely no need to continue litigating. Instead, R.R. and his attorney rejected EPISD's settlement, walked out of the resolution meeting, continued litigation, and unreasonably protracted the resolution of this dispute for over three years. See Jason D.W., 158 F.3d at 211 ([F]ailing to settle can constitute protraction under [the IDEA].); Shelly C., 878 F.2d at 863 (reversing summary judgment in part because the district court did not consider whether the parent's attorney unreasonably protracted resolution of the dispute when the parties ultimately settled). Accordingly, we conclude that the district court here abused its discretion in awarding attorney's fees to R.R. for work performed prior to EPISD's written settlement offer of all requested relief and reasonable attorney's fees. [T]he IDEA only guarantees the right to a free education; it does not explicitly guarantee the right to attorney's fees incurred in pursuit of that education. T.D. v. LaGrange, 349 F.3d at 477.