Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> How Appealing

Litigation

: How Appealing

"Although I have been on the short end of en banc votes before, this is the first time in sixteen years on the bench that I have written, or even joined, a dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc."

"Although I have been on the short end of en banc votes before, this is the first time in sixteen years on the bench that I have written, or even joined, a dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc." So begins a dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc that Eleventh Circuit Judge Ed Carnes issued today.

The balance of that dissent is expressly devoted to explaining why the case presents a strong candidate for U.S. Supreme Court review on the question whether "Under the federal fee-shifting statutes can a reasonable attorney's fee be enhanced based on extraordinary effort or results where some evidence and findings support the enhancement, or are all of the factors that lead to the quality of the performance and the results obtained already covered in the lodestar calculation, as the opinions in Delaware Valley and Dague imply?"

My earlier coverage of the three-judge panel's ruling in this case can be accessed here.

Full post as published by How Appealing on November 05, 2008 (boomark / email).