Crooker v. Tax Division
Case Date: 08/20/1996
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 96-1094
|
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 96-1094 MICHAEL A. CROOKER, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. TAX DIVISION OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Michael Ponsor, U.S. District Judge] ____________________ Before Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________ Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges. ______________ ____________________ Michael Alan Crooker on brief pro se. ____________________ Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Karen L. Goodwin, ________________ _________________ Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellees. ____________________ August 20, 1996 ____________________ Per Curiam. We have reviewed the parties' briefs and ___________ the record on appeal. As in the case of an award of attorney's fees under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(E), see Crooker v. United States Parole ___ _______ _____________________ Comm'n, 776 F.2d 366, 367 (1st Cir. 1985), the decision to ______ award litigation costs, even to a complainant found to have substantially prevailed, is within the sound discretion of the district court. The magistrate judge amply supported his recommendation that costs not be awarded - a recommendation adopted by the district court. There was no abuse of discretion in declining to award costs in this case. Appellant's motion for summary reversal is denied. _______ The judgment of the district court is affirmed. _________ -2- |