quite differently. To begin with, the U.S. District Court
for the District of Maryland has adopted guidelines (revisions are currently being discussed) which provide a presumptively applicable hourly rate ranging from $135- 170 per hour for the least experienced attorneys and $200-275 for those with 8 or more years of experience. These presumptive rates are considerably lower than the so-called “Laffey”rates applied by the District of Columbia federal courts.45 While there are no similar hourly rate guidelines applicable to Maryland courts, practitioners in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area have sometimes been successful in persuading Maryland courts to use actual or modified Laffey rates. Fees in both federal and Maryland
courts are determined by using “lodestar factors,” i.e., taking “the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate.”46 The Court of Appeals has instructed that the analysis should be done on a case by case basis. Generally, some or all of the following twelve factors are weighed to determine reasonableness: “(1) the time and labor required (the judge should weigh the hours claimed against his or her own knowledge, experience, and expertise and, if more than one attorney is involved, scrutinize the possibility of duplication); (2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions (cases of first impression generally require more time and effort); (3) the skill required to perform the legal service properly; (4) the preclusion of other employment by the attorney due to acceptance of the case; (5) the customary fee for similar work in the community; (6) whether the fee is fixed or contingent
44 45
42 U.S.C. § 1981(a)(3).
“Laffey Rates” promulgated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office and applied as presump- tively valid by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia which range from $205 for the least experienced attorneys to $305 for those with 8 years experience to $425 for those with 20 or more years experience. Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 572 F. Supp. 354 (D.D.C. 1983), rev’d on other grounds, 746 F.2d 4 (
D.C.Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1021 (1985). They are adjusted on June 1 of every year by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, and can be found at
www.usdoj.gov/usao/dc/Divisions/ Civil_Division/
Laffey_Matrix_6.html.
46
Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433 (1983); Friolo v. Frankel, 819 A.2d 354, 367 (Md. 2003) (“Friolo I”) (evaluating a wage payment case; however Friolo I is also relevant to attorneys’ fees in employment discrimination cases).
Winter 2007
(fee agreed to by client is helpful in dem- onstrating attorney’s fee expectations, litigant should not be awarded fee greater than that he is contractually bound to pay); (7) time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances (whether this was priority work); (8) the amount involved and the results obtained (court should consider amount of damages awarded but also whether decision cor- rects across-the-board discrimination affecting large class of employees); (9) experience, reputation, and ability of attorneys; (10) undesirability of the case (effect on the lawyer in the community for having agreed to take an unpopular
case); (11) nature and length of profes- sional relationship with he client; and (12) awards in similar cases.”47 A further discussion of applying the
“lodestar” method can be found in Manor Country Club v. Flaa.48
Note that the
Court of Appeals, addressing a frequent defense argument, said: Our disposition of this appeal does not require us to reach the merits of appellant’s argument that the Panel based its award of attorney’s fees on a
47 Friolo I, 819 A.2d at n. 2. 48 874 A.2d 1020 (Md. 2005).
Core Funding Group, L.P.
Since 1991, Core Funding Group, L.P. has provided over $150 million dollars in funding to law fi rms.
You’re welcome at Core Funding regardless of the size of your fi rm. So, whether you need several thousand dollars or several million dollars, Core Funding can help.
Trial Reporter 45
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64