--- name: attorneys-fees-motion title: Motion for Attorneys' Fees description: Drafts post-judgment motions for attorneys' fees using the lodestar method. Covers prevailing party analysis, rate justification, hours documentation, billing judgment, lodestar enhancements, and supporting declarations. Trigger when user needs a fee motion, fee petition, lodestar calculation, or post-trial fee application. author: CaseMark author_url: https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/attorneys-fees-motion license: Apache-2.0 version: 0.1.0 execution_mode: open jurisdiction: us practice: litigation language: en tags: [drafting, motion] --- # Motion for Attorneys' Fees Draft a post-judgment fee motion establishing prevailing party status, applying the lodestar method, and presenting a documented fee petition. ## Prerequisites - Final judgment or order establishing prevailing party status - Fee-shifting authority — statute (e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 1988), contract, or common law basis - Contemporaneous time records for all timekeepers - Timekeeper qualifications (CVs, specializations, recognitions) - Rate evidence — recent fee awards, bar surveys, market data - Case docket and procedural history - Local rules on formatting, page limits, and filing deadlines ## Quick Start 1. Confirm fee-shifting basis and prevailing party status from judgment 2. Collect time records, rate evidence, and timekeeper credentials 3. Calculate lodestar: reasonable hours × reasonable rate 4. Document billing judgment (excluded time) to build credibility 5. Draft motion following the section structure below 6. Prepare supporting declaration and exhibit index ## Motion Structure ### I. Caption & Compliance - Full court name, division, case number, party designations - Title: "Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees [and Costs]" - TOC/TOA if required; verify local formatting rules ### II. Introduction | Element | Content | |---------|---------| | Moving party | Name + prevailing party identification | | Fee authority | Statutory citation or contract clause (verbatim) | | Judgment reference | Date, holdings, relief granted | | Total fees sought | Dollar amount with breakdown | | Roadmap | Authority → rates → hours → results | ### III. Litigation Narrative Chronological narrative emphasizing fee-reasonableness factors: - Nature of dispute — claims, defenses, stakes - Procedural milestones with dates — motions (with outcomes), discovery, depositions, trial - Complexity indicators — novel issues, document volume, expert witnesses, party count - Opposing conduct increasing work — cite specific orders/correspondence - Quality of representation — favorable outcomes, results achieved ### IV. Legal Standard Present in this order: 1. **Fee-shifting authority** — quote statutory/contractual language verbatim 2. **Prevailing party test** — jurisdiction-specific; address *Buckhannon* for settlement-based recovery 3. **Lodestar method** — *Hensley v. Eckerhart*, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) 4. **Johnson factors** — if adopted; *Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express*, 488 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974) [VERIFY] 5. **Lodestar enhancements** — *Perdue v. Kenny A.*, 559 U.S. 542 (2010) 6. **Fee allocation** — *Hensley* common-core-of-facts doctrine for partial success 7. **Fees-on-fees** — authority for time spent on the fee motion itself ### V. Prevailing Party Analysis - Quote judgment establishing favorable outcome - Apply jurisdiction's test to specific findings - Address degree of success relative to fees sought - If settlement: address catalyst theory / consent decree applicability - Preempt limited-success arguments ### VI. Lodestar Calculation **A. Rate Justification** — for each timekeeper: | Timekeeper | Role | Years | Rate | Market Evidence | |------------|------|-------|------|-----------------| | [Name] | Partner | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] | | [Name] | Associate | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] | | [Name] | Paralegal | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] | Support with: comparable fee awards, bar survey data, attorney qualifications. **B. Hours by Phase** | Phase | Hours | Justification | |-------|-------|---------------| | Case assessment & pleadings | | Complexity, investigation scope | | Written discovery | | Volume, disputes | | Document review | | Document count, privilege review | | Depositions | | Witness count, preparation | | Motion practice | | Per-motion breakdown with outcomes | | Expert work | | Retention, reports | | Settlement/mediation | | Sessions, preparation | | Trial preparation | | Witnesses, exhibits | | Trial/hearing | | Days in court | | Post-judgment | | Fee motion, enforcement | | **Total** | | | **C. Billing Judgment** — document excluded time: - Clerical tasks at professional rates - Duplicative research or learning curve - Error correction - Quantify hours excluded per category **D. Staffing Appropriateness** — routine tasks to associates/paralegals; justify senior time on routine work. **E. Enhancement** (if sought) — multiplier, basis (exceptional results, contingent risk, complexity), jurisdiction-specific authority, inadequacy of base lodestar. ### VII. Supporting Declaration Numbered-paragraph declaration under penalty of perjury: - ¶¶ 1–3: Declarant qualifications, role, personal knowledge - ¶¶ 4–6: Time record authentication — contemporaneous, accurate - ¶¶ 7–9: Billing judgment — categories excluded, amounts - ¶¶ 10–12: Rate reasonableness — customary rates, market consistency - ¶¶ 13–15: Hours reasonableness — necessity, complexity, staffing - ¶¶ 16+: Additional timekeepers (qualifications, rates) - Execution block: venue, date, signature, notarization if required Consider supplemental declarations: peer rate affidavits, client value declaration. ### VIII. Exhibits | Exhibit | Contents | |---------|----------| | A | Detailed time records (date, timekeeper, hours, description) | | B | Judgment/order establishing prevailing party status | | C | Fee-shifting statute or contract provision | | D | Timekeeper resumes/CVs | | E | Market rate evidence (fee awards, surveys) | | F | Comparable fee award orders | | G | Key orders showing complexity/opposing conduct | Redact work product from time entries; explain redactions in declaration. ### IX. Prayer for Relief - Attorneys' fees: $[amount] (lodestar) [+ enhancement = $[total]] - Taxable costs per statute/rule - Expert witness fees (if recoverable) - Pre/post-judgment interest (specify rate and calculation date) - Fees-on-fees (supplemental application reserved) - Such other relief as the court deems just ## Pitfalls & Checks - **Cite precisely** — Bluebook format; verify citations are current and not overruled - **Quote the record** — every factual assertion must cite a specific document or order - **No inflation** — time entries must be truthful; never exaggerate hours - **Candor to tribunal** — disclose adverse authority; represent holdings accurately - **Protect privilege** — redact work product; generalize strategy-revealing descriptions - **Anticipate opposition** — preempt rate, hours, staffing, block-billing, and limited-success objections - **Deadline compliance** — commonly 14 days from judgment under FRCP 54(d)(2); check local rules - **Jurisdiction-specific** — verify catalyst theory recognition; check state lodestar variations - **Mark uncertain citations** with [VERIFY]