Learn more about the EAJA

EAJA Awards

Filters
Agency Agency subcomponent Name Award date Award amount Awardees Claims description Finding basis Actions
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management WildEarth Guardians, Montana Environmental Information Center et al v. BLM
$ 170,000
David Katz, Bonnie Martinell, and Jack Martinell Plaintiffs challenged two oil and gas lease sales in Montana where 287 leases were issued. Plaintiffs sued on NEPA grounds for inadequate analysis of impacts to climate change and groundwater. Judge found error in BLM's analysis and vacated the leases. Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Katherns v. Zinke
$ 165,215
Virginia Sue Katherns This case is the last remaining challenge to BLM’s 2018 decision to conduct a spay study on wild horses from the Warm Springs Herd Management Area in the Burns District of Oregon. Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which the court granted on November 13, 2018. In March 2020, the court lifted the stay and dismissed the case with prejudice. Court ruled against agency on First Amendment claim and an Administrative Procedure Act claim. On December 4, 2020, the court issued an order awarding plaintiffs' fees and costs of $183,572.40. BLM, through DOJ, negotiated a settlement amount of $165,215.00. Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Savage (E. Reservoir)
$ 163,234
Rebecca Smith and Tim Bechtold Ninth Circuit sided with Plaintiff holding that the Federal Defendents acted arbitrarily and capriciously by failing to first assess the baseline road mileage within the BORZ, in violation of NFMA. Court found the plaintiffs prevailed under EAJA and ESA Show
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Western Watersheds Project, Sierra Club, Wyoming Wildlife Advocates and Gallatin Wildlife Association
$ 160,000
Nathan D. Rectanus, Matthew R. Arnold and William S. Eubanks, II 1) Claims the Forest Service refusal to examine any alternatives contemplating a phase out of artificial feeding at Alkali Creek shifted the Forest Service's obligations under NEPA to consider less environmentally harmful alternatives, 2) Claims the Forest Service failed to take a "hard look" at the environmental impacts of its decision by inappropriately deferring to Wyoming Game and Fish Commission's assessment of the threats associated with CWD and the need for artificial feeding of elk, and 3) Claims the Forest Service arbitrarily constrained its review of cumulative impacts by refusing to examine Alkali Creek in conjunction with other feed grounds in the Forest, or with efforts by NPS and FWS to phase out artificial feeding on the NER through its 2007 BEMP. On 9/21/2021, the District Court of Wyoming issued an order stating that the Forest Service violated NEPA in authorizing the five-year special use permit for the Alkali Creek feed ground under a categorical exclusion. Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) American Stewards of Liberty; Charles Shell; Cheryl Shell; Walter Sidney Shell Management Trust; Kathryn Heidemann; Robert V. Harrison, Sr. v. DOI
$ 160,000
Paul S. Weiland, Nossaman LLP Plaintiffs alleged the FWS violated the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) and the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) in connection with the Service’s negative 90-day finding, 80 Fed. Reg. 30,990 (June 1, 2015), which found Plaintiffs’ 2014 petition requesting removal of the Bone Cave harvestman from the federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife under the ESA did not present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that delisting may be warranted. Court finding that agency decision was arbitrary and capricious Show
U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs City of Evanston, et al v. Garland
$ 160,000
U.S. Conference of Mayors Plaintiffs challenged certain immigration-related conditions imposed by DOJ on the FY 2017 and FY 2018 Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) grant program. Following an initial ruling in the plaintiffs' favor and subsequent appeal by the U.S., the parties entered a settlement agreement. Settlement Agreement Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security USCIS Saravia v. Garland
$ 152,279
REDACTED Lawsuit against multiple DHS agencies alleging violation of the rights of non-citizen minors who were once detained in U.S. Govt. custody and alleging that USCIS used information from the so-called “gang memos” as evidence to support of denial of SIJ, asylum, T and U visa status. DHS settled the case and USCIS was assigned a portion of the EAJA fee payout. Plaintiff was the prevailing party whose position was substantially justified. Show
U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency Public Justice Foundation, et al. v. Farm Service Agency
$ 150,500
Public Justice Foundation FOIA Null Show
U.S. Department of Defense Defense Information Systems Agency APPEAL OF NETWORK DOCUMENTATION & IMPLEMENTATION, INC.
$ 150,000
Network Documentation & Implementation, Inc. NDI asserted a claim based upon an alleged implied-in-fact contract with the Defense Information Systems Agency (“DISA”) at the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”). Settlement Agreement Show
Other Agency National Labor Relations Board Ridgewood Health Care Center, Inc., v. NLRB
$ 150,000
Ridgewood Health Care Center, Inc., Attorneys fees. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that NLRB's findings that the claimant was a successor employer. The Employer requested $199,207.67 in EAJA fees and costs, which includes fees and costs incurred during part of the administrative case. It has also reserved the right to supplement its fee application to include the EAJA proceedings. On June 3, 2022, Ridgewood filed a motion to withdraw their application, stating that the parties previously reached a settlement and the settlement terms have been implemented. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security USCIS Saget v. Biden
$ 150,000
REDACTED Challenge to the termination of designation of Temporary Protected Status for certain Haitians Settlement-stipulation of the parties Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security USCIS Edakunni v. Mayorkas
$ 150,000
REDACTED Challenge to backlog in processing EAD’s for the H-4 (c26) and L-2 (a18) spousal visa categories, related to biometrics requirements and delays in scheduling in person biometrics appointments due to COVID19. Settlement-stipulation of the parties Show
Social Security Administration Null Marasco & Nesselbush, LLP v. Collins et al
$ 150,000
Marasco & Nesselbush, LLP Action for mandamus and declaratory relief under the APA regarding SSA rules for payment of attorney fees to representation of claimants for benefits under Section 206 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 406). Implementation of Court of Appeals decision that SSA rules 1) barring payments to attorneys whose fees were not approved before their move to government employment & 2) barring direct fee payments from past-due benefits to law firms on behalf of their salaried associates were both arbitrary under the APA Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Dine Citizens Against Ruining the Environment v. BLM
$ 150,000
Western Environmental Law Center Plaintiffs challenge oil and gas leases. Plaintiffs argue the BLM violated NEPA by (1) failing to analyze the context and severity of the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change; (2) failing to evaluate foreseeable direct and cumulative human health impacts and prepare a Health Impact Assessment; (3) failing to analyze disproportionate effects of oil and gas lease sales on environmental justice populations; (4) failing to provide a comment period on the draft EA for the lease sale and limiting the protest period to 10 days; and (5) failing to prepare an EIS when the leases will allegedly have significant impacts to air quality, water quality and quantity, climate, public health, and environmental justice. BLM agreed to seek voluntary remand of the challenged leasing decisions and prepare supplemental NEPA analysis Show
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service High Country Conservation Advocates et al v. United States Forest Service et al
$ 147,631
Edward B. Zukoski and Mary Emily Splitek Violated NEPA failing to consider an alternative that would have protected the Pilot Knob Roadless Area from coal mining. Failed to disclose or analyze the water, wildlife, vegetation or other resources across the 19, 700-acre exception area, making it impossible for the agency to fairly compare alternative courses of action. Failed to acknowledge and account for the environmental impacts of the increased demand for coal which will be induced by its decision. Failure to take a "hard Look" at the Climate Impacts of the Lease Modifications. The decision to eliminate the Pilot Know Alternative from Exception SFEIS was arbitrary and thus violated NEPA Show
Viewing 15 of 73710 results