Fee Dispute in Gun Case Heats Up
Dick Heller of D.C. v. Heller fame has his gun permit (
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/18/AR2008081801004.html?hpid=moreheadlines
), but his lawyers -- the ones who successfully argued for his
individual right to keep and bear arms -- are still trying to pry
their fees from the District of Columbia. Initially, both sides
expressed a hope that the matter could be settled out of court, but
discussions quickly unraveled.
In August, the BLT reported (
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2008/08/heller-lawyers.html )
that Heller’s team of lawyers, led by Gura & Possessky’s Alan Gura,
wanted nearly $3.6 million in attorneys’ fees and costs for about six
years of toil on the case. They asked Judge Emmet Sullivan for a fee
enhancement, based on the exceptional nature of the case -- “one of
the most profound and important victories available under our system
of justice,” Gura declared in his fee request. The fee enhancement
would multiply each lawyer’s hours by two, so Gura’s estimated 1,661
hours, at a rate of $557 per hour, would earn him about $1.9 million.
After negotiations between the parties collapsed in September, the
District filed an opposition brief (
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/files/47-1.pdf ), complaining
that the $3.6 million request was “highly unreasonable.” The city
proposed $798,232 in fees and $9,480 in litigation costs. Acting D.C.
Attorney General Peter Nickles conceded the victory was “significant”
and that the attorneys' performance was "above-average," but he said a
fee enhancement was unwarranted because the Heller team succeeded on
proven legal theories -- rather than novel ones -- and with the help
of nearly 50 amicus briefs from various states and members of
Congress. Nickles accused the team of “over-preparation” and of
larding its bill with hours from minor and unsuccessful motions. He
also pointed out that three of the seven attorneys on the Heller team
did not keep time records, meaning Judge Sullivan would have to rely
on the “self-serving recollections of counsel years after the fact.” 

Last week, Gura filed this (
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/files/hellerGura.pdf ) reply,
blasting the D.C. government for mounting a defense valued “into the
millions” while attempting to diminish the work of the Heller team,
which includes Gura, Clark Neily III, a senior attorney at the
Institute for Justice, and the Cato Institute’s Robert Levy, the
wealthy businessman-turned-lawyer who financed the litigation. The
District tapped O’Melveny & Myers; Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld; and
Covington & Burling for help. O’Melveny veteran Walter Dellinger
handled the Supreme Court argument. Gura argued for Heller, his first
appearance before the high court. “No person faintly knowledgeable
with the practice of law could credibly claim that a case of this
magnitude would be litigated in less than 1,000 hours by its lead
counsel,” Gura said. The Heller team, he added, "should not be paid
for winning, only a very small fraction of what the other side spent
or would have spent losing.”
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2008/10/fee-dispute-in.html 
 
**************************************************
Professor Joseph Olson, J.D., LL.M.                        o- 
651-523-2142  
Hamline University School of Law (MS-D2037)         f-  
651-523-2236
St. Paul, MN  55113-1235                                      c- 
612-865-7956
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                               
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to