December 29, 2011, 03:22 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
Important Court Ruling
WASHINGTON — The District of Columbia has been ordered to pay more than $1 million in attorneys' fees as a result of a historic gun case that was ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world...y-1280320.html Hopefully a warning, now that so many cities and states are broke, maybe this will make them set back and take notice.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
December 29, 2011, 04:25 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,970
|
Thanks for the post kraigwy.
Although a million dollars is sooo menial for the history of abuse to the people and their 2nd Amend rights in places such as Washington, city's in New York,etc., at least it's something. Can this decision be appealed? |
December 29, 2011, 04:52 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
|
More taxpayer money down the drain, if DC ever pays up which they will no doubt drag their feet on to no end.
None the less yet a further victory in a fight against gun grabbers, hopefully this will make municipalities with already tight budgets think twice before they institute frivolous unconstitutional restrictions on the second amendment. |
December 29, 2011, 05:24 PM | #4 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Niiice!
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
December 29, 2011, 05:58 PM | #5 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
I hope Lisa Madigan is listening...
Illinois is already broke, I wonder how much of my tax bill will go to pay David Jensen?
|
December 29, 2011, 06:01 PM | #6 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Here's the decision: https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin...?2003cv0213-86 It's 65 pages of the Judge mostly agreeing with D.C.
After almost 22 pages of discourse on what the opposing counsel wants as rates, the court makes this statement: Quote:
The court then proceeds to use the lowest rates (USAO Laffey) and awards Mr. Gura, Mr. Neily, Mr. Levy, Mr. Healy, Ms. Possessky a rate of $420/hr and awards Mr. Huff a rate of $275/hr. The court then opines that because Mr. Levy was not a practiced litigator, the court further reduced his fee by 25%, to $315/hr. Now comes the matter of billable hours. Claimed by the plaintifs:
The court then reduces Mr. Levy's hrs by a further 25% for vague and inadequate descriptions of the preferred entries. The court then strikes certain events/entries in plaintiffs billing as being non-compensable items. This amounts to 7.9 hrs not allowed. The court then strikes 102.8 hrs from plaintiffs attorneys for time spent on the cross-petition to include the rest of the Parker plaintiffs. The court concludes that this was fractionable from the Heller litigation and not necessary for Heller's victory (Gura: 56.3 hrs; Neily: 27.3 hrs; Levy: 19.2 hrs). So we end up with the following:
The Judge then declined any other enhancements, basically saying that the case was normal and not extraordinary in any way. At this point, D.C. owes the money and it can now be charged legal interest (7.5% = .625% per month = ~$7K per month compounded) for every month that goes by without payment. |
|
December 29, 2011, 06:08 PM | #7 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Happy New Year!
This is a great way to end one year and usher in a new one. I hope other jurisdictions who can't read the plain English of Heller and MacDonald will pay heed. |
December 29, 2011, 07:26 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2006
Posts: 1,433
|
Other than being the most thorough, accurate and logical consideration, analysis, interpretation and application of the Second Amendment in the history of the only(?) nation which has such a law, Heller was not uncommon or extraordinary in any way.
__________________
Vietnam Veteran ('69-'70) NRA Life Member RMEF Life Member Last edited by lefteye; December 29, 2011 at 07:29 PM. Reason: color correction |
December 29, 2011, 07:35 PM | #9 | |
Junior member
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
|
Quote:
|
|
December 29, 2011, 11:29 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
|
Illinois is almost as bad as California, last time I checked CPS(Chicago public schools) takes on average over a year to pay for certain things. In my line of work we simply refuse to directly deal with CPS, Financing them for a year plus for free. The CDB (Capitol Development Board) is almost as bad, bottom line we're broke! I just hope the broke-ness keeps states like Illinois from fighting losing legal battles and instead leads to compromise and the passage of good pro 2a legislation.
|
December 29, 2011, 11:44 PM | #11 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
|
The reduction of their hours and rate is pretty normal. One of the reasons attorneys bill what they do.
|
December 30, 2011, 03:02 AM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 11, 1999
Location: Longmont, CO, USA
Posts: 4,530
|
According to an article from Fox News:
Quote:
__________________
Gun Control: The premise that a woman found in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is morally superior to allowing that same woman to defend her life with a firearm. "Science is built up with facts, as a house is with stones. But a collection of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house." - Jules Henri Poincare "Three thousand people died on Sept. 11 because eight pilots were killed" -- former Northwest Airlines pilot Stephen Luckey |
|
December 30, 2011, 09:26 AM | #13 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
That's a pretty stiff reduction. I know attorneys who are three years out of law school making as much as Mr. Huff and Mr. Levy just got paid for litigating a major constitutional issue from district court all the way to the Supreme Court.
Based on this 2010 study, the average billing rate for attorneys in D. C. is $600/hr for partners (Gura & Possessky) and $375/hr for associates. So Gura made about $180 per hour less than the average D.C. lawyer for his effort - and had to wait 3 years (after 7 years of litigation) to even get that. The major plus is there aren't too many places where you can get 7.25% interest right now. If I were Gura, I'd be hoping the city took its sweet time paying that. |
December 30, 2011, 09:38 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2009
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,037
|
Oh, I'd be betting that the District of Columbia will indeed take it's sweet time paying that bill...
__________________
Treat everyone you meet with dignity and respect....but have a plan to kill them just in case. |
December 30, 2011, 10:01 AM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
I believe Levy dropped millions of his own cash into the case to just to keep it going. The judge must have really been upset with him for winning.
Oh, well I guess DC will have to write some extra parking tickets and tow a few more cars next week. One million won't even dent a months worth of parking tickets ($50m between 1 JAN and 1 May in '11): http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...fZJ_story.html
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
December 30, 2011, 02:43 PM | #16 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
This Judge got kicked in the teeth when he dismissed the suit and the D.C. Circuit overruled him. He got kicked again at the Supreme Court. This is his "pound of flesh."
|
December 30, 2011, 04:51 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Location: Vernon AZ
Posts: 1,195
|
I wish public officials who write these ridiculous laws could be held personnally liable for the cost that have been incurred.
|
December 30, 2011, 06:30 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
December 31, 2011, 10:25 AM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
|
I wonder if Gura et. al. can appeal this decision in order to try for full compensation for their expenses and fees?
|
December 31, 2011, 11:01 AM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
What does this do to Mr Gura's billable rate going forward? That might be the best reason to appeal it.
|
December 31, 2011, 11:16 AM | #21 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
The findings of fact (the various discrepancies in billing) probably can not be challenged. The judges discretionary actions in not applying any Loadstar enhancements are what may be appealed.
There is nothing ordinary about this case. It is a case that will be cited for the next 100 years. It took an amazing amount of determination and extraordinary litigation skill to bring this case to its victory. It says something about these 6 attorneys that stuck to litigation when the defendants were going through attorneys like sand through a sieve. <-- This may not be an arguable point, yet it instructs us that nothing about this case was ordinary. Also, consider what this determination will do for Gura's fees in the Chicago case. I'm sure all of this is going through Alan Gura's mind, as he digests this order. |
December 31, 2011, 11:28 AM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 23, 2009
Location: Ft. Collins, CO.
Posts: 398
|
DC will probably procure the money to pay this bill by taxing firearms sales or other specifically-firearms related fees.
You know they will. |
December 31, 2011, 11:44 AM | #23 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
I think it's probably low on the list of priorities but it doesn't seem that exorbitant fees have been challenged or attacked legally.
New York City's fees for a handgun license cost as much as many pistols do. ($340.00. and $94.25 for fingerprints) I have no idea what Chicago and Ilinois will eventually do - but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Right now we have to focus on getting a good carry law. |
December 31, 2011, 11:53 AM | #24 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Count, see Kwong, et al v. Bloomberg et al. for an attack on exorbitant fees (#40 in the 2A Cases Thread - post #3).
|
December 31, 2011, 11:00 PM | #25 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
^ wow, you got it all covered Al.
I know the courts go slowly (Moore v Madigan is killing me), but the Kwong case is from April |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|