ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Qui Tam Blogs -> Virginia Qui Tam Law

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Qui Tam

: Virginia Qui Tam Law

Yet Another Reminder About Attorney Fees Petitions

By Zachary A. Kitts

ADVERTISEMENTS


The Virginia Lawyer's Weekly blog has a post today relating to the use of the Laffey-Matrix in fee shifting cases.  It is not clear whether the Laffey Matrix at issue is the real Laffey Matrix (that is, the one prepared by the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Division) or the Laffey Matrix prepared by a private-sector expert economist.    

Actually, the blog post--like the Fourth Circuit's recent opinion--has little to do with "the Matrix."  Instead, the opinion has more to do with the Fourth Circuit's on-going refusal to award attorney's fees at a particular hourly rate without some evidence to support that rate as reasonable. 

In Robinson v. Equifax Information Services, Judge Lee in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia awarded an attorney $268,652 in attorney's fees on a $200,000 damage award under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.  The FCRA carries a mandatory attorney's fees provision, requiring a losing defendant to pay all of the reasonable attorney's fees incurred by a plaintiff.  

The real Laffey Matrix is prepared each by the U.S. Department of Justice, and sets forth the reasonable market-supported attorney's fees for the D.C. area.  The plaintiff's attorneys wisely attached a copy of the most recent Laffey Matrix with their attorney's fee petition. 

They failed to include evidence that the Laffey Matrix rate was a reasonable one for their work.  Such evidence is normally provide by way of an affidavit from a fellow attorney saying that the rates in the Laffey Matrix were reasonable ones for the work on the case.     

On March 16, a Fourth Circuit appellate panel affirmed the damage award but sent the case back for recalculation of the attorney?s fees after more evidence on the ?prevailing rate?--i.e., an affidavit such as this one.  

  

Full post as published by Virginia Qui Tam Law on March 18, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0143 secs (new cache)