Jerry and Patricia A. Dixon, et al. - Page 14

                                       - 14 -                                         
               In considering the appellate fee requests, we solicited the            
          parties’ views as to whether we were limited to section 7430,               
          cited in their requests, or were instead free to proceed under              
          section 6673(a)(2), on which we relied in Dixon IV.10  In a May             
          2005 order, we expressed the view that “there are substantial               
          obstacles to awarding appellate fees and costs under section                
          6673(a)(2)”.  Shortly thereafter, the Youngs filed a motion in              
          this Court for attorney’s fees under section 6673 relating to               
          services performed (and expenses incurred) by Izen on appeal.               
               In August 2005, the PH petitioners amended their appellate             
          fee request to assert entitlement under the “bad faith” exception           
          to the so-called American rule (hereafter, the bad faith                    
          exception), while continuing to rely on section 7430 as an                  
          alternative ground.11  By the amendment, the PH petitioners also            
          seek interest on the requested fees and expenses from January 17,           
          2003 (the date of the Court of Appeals’ Dixon V opinion).                   
               In an order dated September 1, 2005, which we incorporate by           
          reference and reproduce as Appendix A, we concluded that “the               

          10 Sec. 7430 contains certain conditions and limitations                    
          that do not apply to fee awards under sec. 6673(a)(2).  See infra           
          Parts I.A., I.C.                                                            
          11 The American rule generally prohibits a Federal court                    
          from awarding attorney’s fees in the absence of a statute or                
          contract providing for a fee award.  Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501           
          U.S. 32, 61 (1991) (Kennedy, J., dissenting) (citing Alyeska                
          Pipeline Serv. Co. v. Wilderness Socy., 421 U.S. 240, 258-259               

Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011