The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert | |||
![]() |
|||
|
|||
Subscribe to the Newsletter Helpful Links Texas Consumer Complaint Center Credit Reports and Identity Theft Your Guide to Small Claims Court Contact Us 1-713-743-2168 |
The People’s Lawyer’s Tip of the DayNever give your social security number to someone you do not know. Identity theft requires a social security number. Protect yours. Hospital Procedure Prices Can Vary GreatlyHow much will a hospital charge you or your insurance company for a procedure? Coke to Stop Marketing to Children Under 12As part of a broad anti-obesity campaign, Coca-Cola will no longer market to children under the age of 12. Your MoneyShould you convert your IRA into a Roth IRA?
For the LawyersLodestar attorney’s fees should consider amount of recovery. The Minnesota Supreme Court held that the amount at stake in a lemon law case should have been considered in determining the reasonableness of attorney fees to be awarded under the lodestar method. The plaintiff recovered $230,000 in attorney fees and costs, based largely on over 600 hours billed by the plaintiff’s attorneys at $350 to $375 per hour. The state Supreme Court first concluded that the lodestar method is the proper approach for determining reasonable attorney fees under state lemon law. The court agreed with the defendant that the amount involved in the litigation and the results obtained must be considered when determining fees under the lodestar method. “It is true that a cap on fees or an examination of the proportionality between the amount of recovery and the fees expended could hamper the ability of consumers to vindicate their rights relative to inexpensive products. But ignoring, as the [trial] court did, the amount involved in the litigation contravenes the principles that underlie statutory attorney fees provisions….” “[Trial] courts, therefore, are directed to exclude from fee awards ‘hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.’ Because billing judgment is necessarily related to the merits of the case and the amount at issue in a consumer protection case, divorcing an award of attorney fees entirely from the amount at stake in the litigation would relieve attorneys from the need to exercise such judgment.”
|
||
To stop receiving email news alerts from the Center for Consumer Law, please click here. |