Legal Definitions - Equal Access to Justice Act

The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) is a federal law passed in 1980 designed to help individuals and small businesses challenge unreasonable actions by the United States government without being overwhelmed by legal costs.

Under the EAJA, if a private party (like an individual, a small business, or certain non-profit organizations) wins a lawsuit against the U.S. government, they may be able to recover their attorney's fees and the costs of expert witnesses. This applies when the government's position in the lawsuit was not "substantially justified," meaning it was unreasonable or lacked a strong legal basis. The Act aims to ensure that people are not deterred from pursuing valid claims against the government simply because they cannot afford the high costs of litigation.

Here are some examples of how the Equal Access to Justice Act might apply:

• Small Business Challenging a Federal Agency Fine: Imagine a small, family-owned restaurant that receives an unexpected and substantial fine from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a minor labeling issue that the restaurant had already corrected and documented. The restaurant believes the fine is excessive and the FDA's enforcement action is unwarranted given their compliance efforts. They hire an attorney to challenge the fine in federal court.

  How EAJA applies: If the restaurant successfully argues its case and the court determines that the FDA's decision to impose the fine was not "substantially justified," the EAJA could allow the restaurant to recover the legal fees it paid to its attorney, making it financially feasible for them to fight an unreasonable government action.

• Individual Appealing a Denied Government Benefit: Consider an elderly individual who applies for disability benefits through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), providing extensive medical records and expert opinions supporting their claim. The VA repeatedly denies the claim without a clear, evidence-based explanation, forcing the individual to appeal the decision in federal court.

  How EAJA applies: If the individual ultimately wins their appeal in court, and the court finds that the VA's repeated denials were not "substantially justified" given the evidence, the EAJA would allow the individual to recover the attorney's fees incurred during the lengthy appeals process. This helps ensure that individuals can access rightful benefits without being financially burdened by the cost of challenging an agency's unreasonable stance.

• Non-Profit Challenging an Environmental Decision: A local environmental non-profit organization challenges a decision by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to approve a new mining project on public land, arguing that the BLM failed to adequately assess the environmental impact as required by law. The non-profit hires legal counsel and environmental experts to present their case in court.

  How EAJA applies: If the non-profit prevails in court, and the judge concludes that the BLM's approval of the project was not "substantially justified" (e.g., due to a clear failure to follow environmental regulations), the EAJA could enable the non-profit to recover its legal fees and the costs of its expert witnesses. This provision helps public interest groups hold federal agencies accountable for their decisions affecting public resources.