Constitutional Law

Heller team reply on motion for attorneys' fees

Here, in pdf. As might be expected, it is well-written and merciless. In trying to hold the award down, DC apparently argued that it was a perfectly ordinary appeal, so Gura takes all their requests for extensions of time, which universally claimed that it was unbelievably complex, and sticks it in their craw. It ends with

"Defendants? accusations of ?windfall? are wholly unjustified, factually and legally.

Public interest law does not create great wealth, and this case would be no exception. Awarding
the full amount of the fee request will not bring Plaintiff?s counsels? profits per partner anywhere
near the levels routinely enjoyed by Defendants? attorneys. When public interest lawyers who
have risked significant amounts of their time and money vindicating a dormant civil right seek
fair compensation after years of being paid nothing, charges of avarice are inappropriate and not
well-taken."

Hat tip to Joe Olson....

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on October 13, 2008 (boomark / email).