AHO v. CLARK

Nos. 77-2695, 77-2732.

608 F.2d 365 (1979)

Madeline and David AHO, and Jessie, William, Annie and Mary Gail Preston, by their mother and next friend Jean Aho; and Edwina, Louise and June Richards, by their mother and next friend Margaret Richards, on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated; and Koolauloa Welfare Rights Groups, an unincorporated non-profit association, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Charles CLARK, Superintendent of Education, State of Hawaii; Stanley W. Doucette, Director of School Lunch Services for the Department of Education, State of Hawaii; Noboru Yonamine, Darrow Aiona, George Adachi, Richard Ando, Hubert Minn, Marion Saunders, Howard Takenaka, Ruth Tabrah, and Hiroshi Yamashita, members of the Board of Education, State of Hawaii, Defendants-Appellees. Madeline and David AHO, and Jessie, William, Annie and Mary Gail Preston, by their mother and next friend Margaret Richards, on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated; and Koolauloa Welfare Rights Group, an unincorporated non-Profit association, Plaintiffs-Cross-Appellees, v. Charles CLARK, Superintendent of Education, State of Hawaii; Stanley W. Doucette, Director of School Lunch Services for the Department of Education, State of Hawaii; Noboru Yonamine, Darrow Aiona, George Adachi, Richard Ando, Hubert Minn, Marion Saunders, Howard Takenaka, Ruth Tabrah, and Hiroshi Yamashita, members of the Board of Education, State of Hawaii, Defendants-Cross-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

November 14, 1979.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Shelby Anne Floyd, Paul, Johnson & Alston, Honolulu, Hawaii, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Maria L. Sousa, Deputy Atty. Gen., Honolulu, Hawaii, argued for defendants-appellees; Ronald Y. Amemiya, Atty. Gen., Honolulu, Hawaii, on the brief.

Before SNEED and HUG, Circuit Judges, and ZIRPOLI, District Judge.


SNEED, Circuit Judge:

Appellants appeal the denial of their request for attorneys' fees in connection with litigation which resulted in a consent agreement expanding the school breakfast program in Hawaii's public school system. Appellees cross-appeal the denial of their motion to have the consent agreement set aside. We are called upon to determine whether the district court abused its discretion in denying these motions. For the reasons set forth in this opinion...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases