Lodestar method

Last updated

In the legal realm, the "lodestar method" refers to a method of computing attorney's fees whereby a trial court must multiply the number of hours reasonably spent by trial counsel by a reasonable hourly rate. This figure can then be adjusted upward or downward for certain factors known as multipliers, such as contingency and the quality of the work performed, to arrive at a final fee. Under the lodestar method, the most heavily weighted multipliers are the time and labor required. [1]

Related Research Articles

In a legal dispute, one party has the burden of proof to show that they are correct, while the other party has no such burden and is presumed to be correct. The burden of proof requires a party to produce evidence to establish the truth of facts needed to satisfy all the required legal elements of the dispute.

In English civil litigation, costs are the lawyers' fees and disbursements of the parties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Acquittal</span> The legal result of a verdict of not guilty

In common law jurisdictions, an acquittal means that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charge presented. It certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as criminal law is concerned. The finality of an acquittal is dependent on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the United States, an acquittal prohibits the retrial of the accused for the same offense, even if new evidence surfaces that further implicates the accused. The effect of an acquittal on criminal proceedings is the same whether it results from a jury verdict or results from the operation of some other rule that discharges the accused. In other countries, like Australia and the UK, the prosecuting authority may appeal an acquittal similar to how a defendant may appeal a conviction — but usually only if new and compelling evidence comes to light or the accused has interfered with or intimidated a juror or witness.

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision with regard to aggravating factors in crimes. The Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibited judges from enhancing criminal sentences beyond statutory maxima based on facts other than those decided by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The decision has been a cornerstone in the modern resurgence in jury trial rights. As Justice Scalia noted in his concurring opinion, the jury-trial right "has never been efficient; but it has always been free."

Beyond (a) reasonable doubt is a legal standard of proof required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems. It is a higher standard of proof than the standard of balance of probabilities commonly used in civil cases because the stakes are much higher in a criminal case: a person found guilty can be deprived of liberty, or in extreme cases, life, as well as suffering the collateral consequences and social stigma attached to a conviction. The prosecution is tasked with providing evidence that establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in order to get a conviction; albeit prosecution may fail to complete such task, the trier-of-fact's acceptance that guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt will in theory lead to conviction of the defendant. A failure for the trier-of-fact to accept that the standard of proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt has been met thus entitles the accused to an acquittal. This standard of proof is widely accepted in many criminal justice systems, and its origin can be traced to Blackstone's ratio, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Stumpage is the price a private firm pays for the right to harvest timber from a given land base. It is paid to the current owner of the land. Historically, the price was determined on a basis of the number of trees harvested, or "per stump". Currently it is dictated by more standard measurements such as cubic metres, board feet, or tons. To determine stumpage, any stand that will be harvested by the firm is first assessed and appraised through processes aimed at finding the volume of timber that is to be harvested. A given stumpage rate, measured in $/volume, is then applied to the amount of timber to be harvested. The firm will then pay this price to the landowner.

The American rule is the default legal rule in the United States controlling assessment of attorneys' fees arising out of litigation. It provides that each party is responsible for paying its own attorney's fees, unless specific authority granted by statute or contract allows the assessment of those fees against the other party.

Attorney's fee is a chiefly United States term for compensation for legal services performed by an attorney for a client, in or out of court. It may be an hourly, flat-rate or contingent fee. Recent studies suggest that when lawyers charge a flat-fee rather than billing by the hour, they work less hard on behalf of clients and clients get worse outcomes. Attorney fees are separate from fines, compensatory and punitive damages, and from court costs in a legal case. Under the "American rule", attorney fees are usually not paid by the losing party to the winning party in a case, except pursuant to specific statutory or contractual rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Credit card interest</span>

Credit card interest is a way in which credit card issuers generate revenue. A card issuer is a bank or credit union that gives a consumer a card or account number that can be used with various payees to make payments and borrow money from the bank simultaneously. The bank pays the payee and then charges the cardholder interest over the time the money remains borrowed. Banks suffer losses when cardholders do not pay back the borrowed money as agreed. As a result, optimal calculation of interest based on any information they have about the cardholder's credit risk is key to a card issuer's profitability. Before determining what interest rate to offer, banks typically check national, and international, credit bureau reports to identify the borrowing history of the card holder applicant with other banks and conduct detailed interviews and documentation of the applicant's finances.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gross tonnage</span> Nonlinear measure of a ships overall internal volume

Gross tonnage is a nonlinear measure of a ship's overall internal volume. Gross tonnage is different from gross register tonnage. Neither gross tonnage nor gross register tonnage should be confused with measures of mass or weight such as deadweight tonnage or displacement.

The Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Award Act of 1976 is a law of the United States codified in 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b). It is often referred to as "Section 1988." It allows a Federal court to award reasonable attorney's fees to a prevailing party in certain civil rights cases. The Act was designed to create an enforcement mechanism for the nation's civil rights laws without creating an enforcement bureaucracy, because the prospect of being awarded attorneys' fees is thought to incentivize attorneys to bring civil rights cases on behalf of plaintiffs.

Lodestar is an archaic word for a star that guides, especially the northern pole star.

In the United States of America, the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) authorizes the payment of attorney's fees to a prevailing party in an action against the United States absent a showing by the government that its position in the underlying litigation "was substantially justified". The Act is codified in scattered sections of the United States Code:

<i>Haslem v. Lockwood</i>

Thomas Haslem v. William A. Lockwood, Connecticut, (1871) is an important United States case in property, tort, conversion, trover and nuisance law.

Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices is a proposal for bank regulation in the United States under Federal Reserve Regulation AA. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System announced in a press release on Saturday, May 2, 2008, that the proposed rules, "prohibit unfair practices regarding credit cards and overdraft services that would, among other provisions, protect consumers from unexpected increases in the rate charged on pre-existing credit card balances." Provisions addressing credit card practices aim to enhance protections for consumers who use credit cards and improve the credit card disclosures under the Truth in Lending Act:

Relative value units (RVUs) are a measure of value used in the United States Medicare reimbursement formula for physician services. RVUs are a part of the resource-based relative value scale (RBRVS).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tort law in India</span> Aspect of Indian law

Tort law in India is primarily governed by judicial precedent as in other common law jurisdictions, supplemented by statutes governing damages, civil procedure, and codifying common law torts. As in other common law jurisdictions, a tort is breach of a non-contractual duty which has caused damage to the plaintiff giving rise to a civil cause of action and for which remedy is available. If a remedy does not exist, a tort has not been committed since the rationale of tort law is to provide a remedy to the person who has been wronged.

<i>United States v. ASCAP</i> American legal case

United States v. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) et al., No. 09-0539, 2010 WL 3749292, was a United States Court of Appeals case involving copyright liability for third-party vendors that provide online music download services. In particular, the Second Circuit ruled that music downloads do not constitute public performances, upholding the district court's decision and consequently preventing ASCAP from claiming higher royalty fees from Yahoo! and RealNetworks for downloaded music. However, the Second Circuit disagreed with the district court's method of fee assessment and remanded the case for further proceedings. ASCAP appealed the decision and requested a writ of certiorari for judicial review in the Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States constitutional criminal procedure</span> United States constitutional criminal procedure

The United States Constitution contains several provisions regarding the law of criminal procedure.

Peter v. NantKwest Inc., 589 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case from the October 2019 term.

References

  1. "Friedrich et al. v. Fidelity National Bank, 247 Ga. App. 704, 545 S.E.2d 107(2001)". Google Scholar . Retrieved 2013-12-11.