perdue
governor
georgia
et
al
kenny
next
friend
winn
et
argued
october
decided
april
title
authorizes
courts
award
reasonable
attorney
fee
prevailing
parties
civil
rights
actions
half
respondents
million
fee
request
based
calculation
lodestar
number
hours
attorneys
employees
worked
multiplied
hourly
rates
prevailing
community
half
represented
fee
enhancement
superior
work
results
supported
affidavits
claiming
lodestar
insufficient
induce
lawyers
comparable
skill
experience
litigate
case
awarding
fees
million
district
found
proposed
hourly
rates
fair
reasonable
entries
counsel
billing
records
vague
hours
claimed
many
categories
excessive
therefore
cut
lodestar
approximately
million
enhanced
award
additional
million
eleventh
circuit
affirmed
reliance
precedent
held
calculation
attorney
fee
based
lodestar
may
increased
due
superior
performance
extraordinary
circumstances
pp
lodestar
approach
achieved
dominance
federal
courts
gisbrecht
barnhart
although
imperfect
several
important
virtues
produces
award
approximates
fee
prevailing
attorney
received
representing
paying
client
billed
hour
comparable
case
readily
administrable
see
burlington
dague
objective
hensley
eckerhart
thereby
cabining
trial
judges
discretion
permitting
meaningful
judicial
review
producing
reasonably
predictable
results
pp
established
six
important
rules
lead
today
decision
first
reasonable
fee
one
sufficient
induce
capable
attorney
undertake
representation
meritorious
civil
rights
case
see
pennsylvania
delaware
valley
citizens
council
clean
air
provide
form
economic
relief
improve
financial
lot
attorneys
ibid
second
strong
presumption
lodestar
method
yields
sufficient
fee
see
third
never
sustained
enhancement
lodestar
amount
performance
repeatedly
said
enhancement
may
awarded
rare
exceptional
circumstances
fourth
lodestar
includes
relevant
factors
constituting
attorney
fee
enhancement
may
based
factor
subsumed
lodestar
calculation
case
novelty
complexity
see
blum
stenson
quality
attorney
performance
delaware
valley
supra
fifth
burden
proving
enhancement
necessary
must
borne
fee
applicant
blum
sixth
applicant
seeking
enhancement
must
produce
specific
evidence
supporting
award
assure
calculation
objective
capable
reviewed
appeal
pp
rejects
contention
fee
determined
lodestar
method
may
enhanced
situation
strong
presumption
lodestar
reasonable
may
overcome
rare
circumstances
lodestar
adequately
account
factor
may
properly
considered
determining
reasonable
fee
treats
quality
attorney
performance
results
obtained
one
factor
since
superior
results
relevant
extent
shown
stem
superior
attorney
performance
another
factor
inferior
performance
opposing
counsel
circumstances
superior
attorney
performance
adequately
taken
account
lodestar
calculation
rare
exceptional
enhancements
awarded
without
specific
evidence
lodestar
fee
adequate
attract
competent
counsel
blum
supra
first
enhancement
may
appropriate
method
used
determine
hourly
rate
adequately
measure
attorney
true
market
value
demonstrated
part
litigation
may
occur
hourly
rate
formula
takes
account
single
factor
years
since
admission
bar
perhaps
similar
factors
case
trial
judge
adjust
hourly
rate
accordance
specific
proof
linking
attorney
ability
prevailing
market
rate
second
enhancement
may
appropriate
attorney
performance
includes
extraordinary
outlay
expenses
litigation
exceptionally
protracted
cases
enhancement
amount
must
calculated
using
method
reasonable
objective
capable
reviewed
appeal
applying
standard
interest
rate
qualifying
expense
outlays
third
enhancement
may
appropriate
attorney
performance
involves
exceptional
delay
payment
fees
case
enhancement
calculated
method
similar
used
exceptional
delay
expense
reimbursement
enhancements
appropriate
ground
departures
hourly
billing
becoming
common
based
flawed
analogy
increasingly
popular
practice
paying
attorneys
reduced
hourly
rate
bonus
obtaining
specified
results
pp
district
provide
proper
justification
fee
enhancement
awarded
case
commented
enhancement
necessary
compensate
counsel
appropriate
hourly
rate
effect
raise
top
rate
per
hour
nothing
record
shows
appropriate
figure
relevant
market
also
emphasized
counsel
make
extraordinary
outlays
expenses
wait
reimbursement
calculate
amount
enhancement
attributable
factor
similarly
noted
counsel
receive
fees
ongoing
basis
case
sufficiently
link
proof
delay
outside
normal
range
expected
attorneys
rely
fees
calculate
cost
counsel
extraordinary
unwarranted
delay
reliance
contingency
outcome
contravenes
dague
supra
finally
insofar
relied
comparison
counsel
performance
case
counsel
unnamed
prior
cases
employ
methodology
permitted
meaningful
appellate
review
determining
reasonable
attorney
fee
within
trial
judge
sound
discretion
discretion
unlimited
judge
must
provide
reasonably
specific
explanation
aspects
fee
determination
including
enhancement
pp
reversed
remanded
alito
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
kennedy
thomas
joined
kennedy
thomas
filed
concurring
opinions
breyer
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
stevens
ginsburg
sotomayor
joined
sonny
perdue
governor
georgia
et
petitioners
kenny
next
friend
linda
winn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
april
justice
alito
delivered
opinion
case
presents
question
whether
calculation
attorney
fee
federal
statutes
based
lodestar
number
hours
worked
multiplied
prevailing
hourly
rates
may
increased
due
superior
performance
stated
previous
cases
increase
permitted
extraordinary
circumstances
reaffirm
rule
also
said
prior
cases
strong
presumption
lodestar
sufficient
factors
subsumed
lodestar
calculation
used
ground
increasing
award
lodestar
party
seeking
fees
burden
identifying
factor
lodestar
adequately
take
account
proving
specificity
enhanced
fee
justified
district
apply
standards
reverse
decision
remand
proceedings
consistent
opinion
respondents
plaintiffs
children
georgia
system
next
friends
filed
class
action
behalf
children
foster
care
named
defendants
governor
georgia
various
state
officials
petitioners
case
claiming
deficiencies
system
two
counties
near
atlanta
violated
federal
state
constitutional
statutory
rights
respondents
sought
injunctive
declaratory
relief
well
attorney
fees
expenses
district
northern
district
georgia
eventually
referred
case
mediation
parties
entered
consent
decree
district
approved
consent
decree
resolved
pending
issues
fees
respondents
attorneys
entitled
receive
respondents
submitted
request
million
attorney
fees
half
amount
based
calculation
lodestar
roughly
hours
multiplied
hourly
rates
attorneys
support
fee
request
respondents
submitted
affidavits
asserting
rates
within
range
prevailing
market
rates
legal
services
relevant
market
half
amount
respondents
sought
represented
fee
enhancement
superior
work
results
affidavits
submitted
support
request
claimed
lodestar
amount
generally
insufficient
induce
lawyers
comparable
skill
judgment
professional
representation
experience
litigate
case
see
app
petitioners
objected
fee
request
contending
proposed
hourly
rates
high
hours
claimed
excessive
enhancement
duplicate
factors
reflected
lodestar
amount
district
awarded
fees
approximately
million
see
supp
nd
district
found
hourly
rates
proposed
respondents
fair
reasonable
entries
counsel
billing
records
vague
hours
claimed
many
billing
categories
excessive
therefore
cut
hours
halved
hourly
rate
travel
hours
resulted
lodestar
calculation
approximately
million
enhanced
award
concluding
lodestar
calculation
take
account
fact
class
counsel
required
advance
case
expenses
million
period
going
reimbursement
fact
class
counsel
paid
basis
work
performed
fact
class
counsel
ability
recover
fee
expense
reimbursement
completely
contingent
outcome
case
stated
respondents
attorneys
exhibited
higher
degree
skill
commitment
dedication
professionalism
seen
displayed
attorneys
case
years
bench
also
commented
results
obtained
added
fter
years
practicing
attorney
federal
judge
unaware
case
plaintiff
class
achieved
favorable
result
comprehensive
scale
enhancement
resulted
additional
million
fee
award
relying
prior
circuit
precedent
panel
eleventh
circuit
affirmed
panel
held
district
abused
discretion
failing
make
larger
reduction
number
hours
respondents
attorneys
sought
reimbursement
panel
commented
cut
billable
hours
deciding
matter
first
instance
added
hourly
rates
approved
district
also
appear
ed
generous
side
question
enhancement
however
panel
splintered
judge
writing
separate
opinion
judge
carnes
concluded
binding
eleventh
circuit
precedent
required
decision
district
affirmed
opined
reasoning
opinions
suggested
enhancement
allowed
case
concluded
quality
attorneys
performance
adequately
accounted
determining
reasonable
number
hours
expended
litigation
setting
reasonable
hourly
rates
quoting
pennsylvania
delaware
valley
citizens
council
clean
air
delaware
valley
found
enhancement
justified
based
delay
recovery
attorney
fees
reimbursable
expenses
delay
routine
feature
cases
brought
reasoned
district
contravened
holding
burlington
dague
relied
fact
class
counsel
compensation
totally
contingent
upon
prevailing
action
quoting
affidavit
support
fee
request
judge
wilson
concurred
judgment
disagreed
judge
carnes
view
eleventh
circuit
precedent
inconsistent
decisions
judge
hill
also
concurred
judgment
expressed
view
correctness
prior
circuit
precedent
eleventh
circuit
denied
rehearing
en
banc
dissent
three
judges
see
judge
wilson
filed
opinion
concurring
denial
rehearing
judge
carnes
joined
judges
tjoflat
dubina
filed
opinion
dissenting
denial
rehearing
judge
tjoflat
filed
separate
dissent
contending
among
things
district
basing
enhancement
large
part
comparison
performance
respondents
attorneys
unnamed
attorneys
whose
work
observed
professional
career
improperly
rendered
decision
effectively
unreviewable
appeal
essentially
served
witness
support
enhancement
granted
certiorari
ii
general
rule
legal
system
party
must
pay
attorney
fees
expenses
see
hensley
eckerhart
congress
enacted
order
ensure
federal
rights
adequately
enforced
section
provides
prevailing
party
certain
civil
rights
actions
may
recover
reasonable
attorney
fee
part
costs
unfortunately
statute
explain
congress
meant
reasonable
fee
therefore
task
identifying
appropriate
methodology
determining
reasonable
fee
left
courts
one
possible
method
set
johnson
georgia
highway
express
listed
factors
consider
determining
reasonable
method
however
gave
little
actual
guidance
district
courts
setting
attorney
fees
reference
series
sometimes
subjective
factors
placed
unlimited
discretion
trial
judges
produced
disparate
results
delaware
valley
supra
alternative
lodestar
approach
pioneered
third
circuit
lindy
builders
philadelphia
american
radiator
standard
sanitary
appeal
remand
achieved
dominance
federal
courts
decision
hensley
gisbrecht
barnhart
since
time
lodestar
figure
name
suggests
become
guiding
light
jurisprudence
ibid
quoting
dague
supra
although
lodestar
method
perfect
several
important
virtues
first
accordance
understanding
aim
statutes
lodestar
looks
prevailing
market
rates
relevant
community
blum
stenson
developed
practice
hourly
billing
become
widespread
see
gisbrecht
supra
lodestar
method
produces
award
roughly
approximates
fee
prevailing
attorney
received
representing
paying
client
billed
hour
comparable
case
second
lodestar
method
readily
administrable
see
dague
see
also
buckhannon
board
care
home
west
virginia
dept
health
human
resources
unlike
johnson
approach
lodestar
calculation
objective
hensley
supra
thus
cabins
discretion
trial
judges
permits
meaningful
judicial
review
produces
reasonably
predictable
results
iii
prior
decisions
concerning
federal
statutes
established
six
important
rules
lead
decision
case
first
reasonable
fee
fee
sufficient
induce
capable
attorney
undertake
representation
meritorious
civil
rights
case
see
delaware
valley
plaintiffs
find
possible
engage
lawyer
based
statutory
assurance
paid
fee
purpose
behind
statute
satisfied
blum
supra
reasonable
attorney
fee
one
adequate
attract
competent
counsel
produce
windfalls
attorneys
ellipsis
brackets
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
section
aim
enforce
covered
civil
rights
statutes
provide
form
economic
relief
improve
financial
lot
attorneys
delaware
valley
supra
second
lodestar
method
yields
fee
presumptively
sufficient
achieve
objective
see
dague
supra
delaware
valley
supra
blum
supra
see
also
gisbrecht
supra
indeed
said
presumption
strong
one
dague
supra
delaware
valley
supra
third
although
never
sustained
enhancement
lodestar
amount
performance
see
brief
amicus
curiae
repeatedly
said
enhancements
may
awarded
circumstances
delaware
valley
supra
blum
supra
hensley
fourth
noted
lodestar
figure
includes
relevant
factors
constituting
attorney
fee
delaware
valley
supra
held
enhancement
may
awarded
based
factor
subsumed
lodestar
calculation
see
dague
supra
pennsylvania
delaware
valley
citizens
council
clean
air
delaware
valley
ii
plurality
opinion
blum
thus
held
novelty
complexity
case
generally
may
used
ground
enhancement
factors
presumably
fully
reflected
number
billable
hours
recorded
counsel
ibid
also
held
quality
attorney
performance
generally
used
adjust
lodestar
ecause
considerations
concerning
quality
prevailing
party
counsel
representation
normally
reflected
reasonable
hourly
rate
delaware
valley
supra
fifth
burden
proving
enhancement
necessary
must
borne
fee
applicant
dague
supra
blum
finally
fee
applicant
seeking
enhancement
must
produce
specific
evidence
supports
award
enhancement
must
based
evidence
enhancement
necessary
provide
fair
reasonable
compensation
requirement
essential
lodestar
method
realize
one
chief
virtues
providing
calculation
objective
capable
reviewed
appeal
iv
light
said
prior
cases
reject
contention
fee
determined
lodestar
method
may
enhanced
situation
lodestar
method
never
intended
conclusive
circumstances
instead
strong
presumption
lodestar
figure
reasonable
presumption
may
overcome
rare
circumstances
lodestar
adequately
take
account
factor
may
properly
considered
determining
reasonable
fee
case
asked
decide
whether
either
quality
attorney
performance
results
obtained
factors
may
properly
provide
basis
enhancement
treat
two
factors
one
plaintiff
attorney
achieves
results
favorable
predicted
based
governing
law
available
evidence
outcome
may
attributable
superior
performance
commitment
resources
plaintiff
counsel
outcome
may
result
inferior
performance
defense
counsel
unanticipated
defense
concessions
unexpectedly
favorable
rulings
unexpectedly
sympathetic
jury
simple
luck
since
none
latter
causes
justify
enhanced
award
superior
results
relevant
extent
shown
result
superior
attorney
performance
thus
need
consider
whether
superior
attorney
performance
justify
enhancement
light
principles
derived
prior
cases
inquire
whether
circumstances
superior
attorney
performance
adequately
taken
account
lodestar
calculation
conclude
circumstances
circumstances
indeed
rare
exceptional
require
specific
evidence
lodestar
fee
adequate
attract
competent
counsel
blum
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
first
enhancement
may
appropriate
method
used
determining
hourly
rate
employed
lodestar
calculation
adequately
measure
attorney
true
market
value
demonstrated
part
may
occur
hourly
rate
determined
formula
takes
account
single
factor
years
since
admission
bar
perhaps
similar
factors
case
enhancement
may
appropriate
attorney
compensated
rate
attorney
receive
cases
governed
federal
statutes
order
provide
calculation
objective
reviewable
trial
judge
adjust
attorney
hourly
rate
accordance
specific
proof
linking
attorney
ability
prevailing
market
rate
second
enhancement
may
appropriate
attorney
performance
includes
extraordinary
outlay
expenses
litigation
exceptionally
protracted
judge
carnes
noted
attorney
agrees
represent
civil
rights
plaintiff
afford
pay
attorney
attorney
presumably
understands
reimbursement
likely
received
successful
resolution
case
therefore
enhancements
compensate
delay
reimbursement
expenses
must
reserved
unusual
cases
exceptional
cases
however
enhancement
may
allowed
amount
enhancement
must
calculated
using
method
reasonable
objective
capable
reviewed
appeal
applying
standard
rate
interest
qualifying
outlays
expenses
third
may
extraordinary
circumstances
attorney
performance
involves
exceptional
delay
payment
fees
attorney
expects
compensated
presumably
understands
payment
fees
generally
come
end
case
see
opinion
carnes
compensation
delay
generally
made
either
basing
award
current
rates
adjusting
fee
based
historical
rates
reflect
present
value
missouri
jenkins
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
rule
possibility
enhancement
may
appropriate
attorney
assumes
costs
face
unanticipated
delay
particularly
delay
unjustifiably
caused
defense
case
however
enhancement
calculated
applying
method
similar
described
connection
exceptional
delay
obtaining
reimbursement
expenses
reject
suggestion
appropriate
grant
performance
enhancements
ground
departures
hourly
billing
becoming
common
noted
lodestar
adopted
part
provides
rough
approximation
general
billing
practices
accordingly
hourly
billing
becomes
unusual
alternative
lodestar
method
may
found
however
neither
respondents
amici
contend
day
arrived
shown
permitting
award
enhancements
top
lodestar
figure
corresponds
prevailing
practice
general
run
cases
told
increasingly
popular
arrangement
attorneys
paid
reduced
hourly
rate
receive
bonus
certain
specified
results
obtained
practice
analogized
award
enhancement
one
case
brief
respondents
analogy
however
flawed
attorney
agrees
outset
representation
reduced
hourly
rate
exchange
opportunity
earn
performance
bonus
position
far
different
attorney
case
compensated
full
prevailing
rate
seeks
performance
enhancement
addition
lodestar
amount
litigation
concluded
reliance
comparisons
purposes
administering
enhancements
therefore
appropriate
present
case
district
provide
proper
justification
large
enhancement
awarded
increased
lodestar
award
far
opinion
reveals
figure
appears
essentially
arbitrary
example
grant
enhancement
instead
increase
respondents
sought
rather
district
commented
enhancement
minimum
enhancement
lodestar
necessary
reasonably
compensate
respondents
counsel
supp
effect
enhancement
increase
top
rate
attorneys
per
district
point
anything
record
shows
appropriate
figure
relevant
market
district
pointed
fact
respondents
counsel
make
extraordinary
outlays
expenses
wait
reimbursement
calculate
amount
enhancement
attributable
factor
similarly
district
noted
respondents
counsel
receive
fees
ongoing
basis
case
pending
sufficiently
link
factor
proof
record
delay
outside
normal
range
expected
attorneys
rely
payment
fees
quantify
disparity
provide
calculation
cost
counsel
extraordinary
unwarranted
delay
reliance
contingency
outcome
contravenes
holding
dague
see
finally
insofar
district
relied
comparison
performance
counsel
case
performance
counsel
unnamed
prior
cases
district
employ
methodology
permitted
meaningful
appellate
review
needless
say
question
sincerity
district
observations
position
assess
accuracy
trial
judge
awards
enhancement
impressionistic
basis
major
purpose
lodestar
method
providing
objective
reviewable
basis
fees
see
undermined
determining
reasonable
attorney
fee
matter
committed
sound
discretion
trial
judge
see
permitting
discretion
award
fees
judge
discretion
unlimited
essential
judge
provide
reasonably
specific
explanation
aspects
fee
determination
including
award
enhancement
unless
explanation
given
adequate
appellate
review
feasible
without
review
widely
disparate
awards
may
made
awards
may
influenced
least
may
appear
influenced
judge
subjective
opinion
regarding
particular
attorneys
importance
case
addition
future
cases
defendants
contemplating
possibility
settlement
way
estimate
likelihood
pay
potentially
huge
enhancement
see
marek
chesny
defendant
unwilling
make
binding
settlement
offer
terms
left
exposed
liability
attorney
fees
whatever
amount
might
fix
motion
plaintiff
section
serves
important
public
purpose
making
possible
persons
without
means
bring
suit
vindicate
rights
unjustified
enhancements
serve
enrich
attorneys
consistent
statute
many
cases
attorney
fees
awarded
paid
individuals
responsible
constitutional
statutory
violations
judgment
based
instead
fees
paid
effect
state
local
taxpayers
state
local
governments
limited
budgets
money
used
pay
attorney
fees
money
used
programs
provide
vital
public
services
cf
horne
flores
slip
payment
money
pursuant
order
diverts
funds
state
local
programs
reasons
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
sonny
perdue
governor
georgia
et
petitioners
kenny
next
friend
linda
winn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
april
justice
kennedy
concurring
one
ask
attorney
judge
name
significant
cases
career
unsurprising
find
list
includes
case
argued
decided
immersed
case
lawyers
judges
find
within
fascination
intricacy
importance
transcends
detached
observer
sees
pending
completed
case
often
seem
extraordinary
participants
dynamic
adversary
system
system
well
serves
law
proper
today
reject
proposition
enhancements
barred
still
must
understood
extraordinary
cases
presented
rarest
circumstances
comments
join
full
opinion
sonny
perdue
governor
georgia
et
petitioners
kenny
next
friend
linda
winn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
april
justice
thomas
concurring
nearly
years
ago
group
attorneys
sought
fee
award
achiev
ing
limited
success
litigating
clients
constitutional
claims
hensley
eckerhart
opinion
resolving
claim
fees
observed
cases
exceptional
success
enhanced
award
attorney
fees
may
justified
emphasis
added
observation
plainly
dicta
one
year
later
relied
reject
argument
lodestar
calculation
never
permissible
blum
stenson
yet
never
sustained
enhancement
lodestar
amount
performance
ante
jurisprudence
since
blum
charted
decisional
arc
bends
decidedly
enhancements
carnes
see
also
ante
today
holds
consistent
hensley
blum
lodestar
fee
award
may
enhanced
attorney
performance
circumstances
indeed
ante
careful
readers
observe
precise
limitations
imposes
availability
enhancements
see
ante
see
also
ante
kennedy
concurring
must
understood
extraordinary
cases
presented
rarest
circumstances
limitations
preserve
prior
cases
advance
attorney
fees
jurisprudence
along
decisional
arc
judge
carnes
described
agree
approach
conclusion
emphasizes
see
ante
lodestar
calculation
virtually
every
case
already
reflect
indicia
attorney
performance
relevant
fee
award
sonny
perdue
governor
georgia
et
petitioners
kenny
next
friend
linda
winn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
april
justice
breyer
justice
stevens
justice
ginsburg
justice
sotomayor
join
concurring
part
dissenting
part
granted
certiorari
case
consider
whether
calculation
attorney
fee
based
ante
opinion
ever
enhanced
based
solely
quality
lawyers
performance
results
obtained
pet
cert
emphasis
added
answers
question
affirmative
see
ante
stated
previous
cases
increase
permitted
extraordinary
circumstances
reaffirm
rule
see
also
ante
kennedy
concurring
prior
precedents
make
clear
lodestar
calculation
end
fee
inquiry
remain
considerations
may
lead
district
adjust
fee
upward
hensley
eckerhart
reason
lodestar
method
never
intended
conclusive
circumstances
ante
instead
today
reaffirms
superior
attorney
performance
leads
exceptional
success
enhanced
award
may
justified
hensley
supra
see
also
pennsylvania
delaware
valley
citizens
council
clean
air
blum
stenson
agree
conclusion
majority
part
ways
respect
question
presented
obliquely
view
inappropriately
appears
consider
nonetheless
namely
whether
lower
courts
correctly
determined
case
exceptional
circumstances
justify
lodestar
enhancement
see
parts
ante
see
also
ante
kennedy
concurring
reach
issue
lies
beyond
narrow
question
agreed
consider
see
limiting
review
first
question
presented
pet
cert
stating
question
see
also
glover
general
rule
decide
issues
outside
questions
presented
believe
twice
removed
litigation
underlying
fee
determination
properly
suited
resolve
inquiry
demands
even
engage
inquiry
hold
district
abuse
discretion
awarding
enhancement
therefore
affirm
judgment
appeals
explains
basic
question
must
resolved
considering
enhancement
lodestar
whether
lodestar
calculation
adequately
measure
attorney
value
demonstrated
performance
litigation
ante
understand
need
answering
question
application
standards
also
believe
answer
inevitably
involves
element
judgment
moreover
reviewing
district
answer
question
appellate
must
inevitably
give
weight
fact
district
better
situated
provide
answer
district
judge
district
judge
read
motions
filed
case
witnessed
proceedings
able
evaluate
attorneys
overall
performance
light
objectives
context
legal
difficulty
practical
obstacles
present
case
word
district
judge
observed
attorney
true
value
demonstrated
litigation
ibid
emphasis
added
contrast
appeals
faced
cold
perhaps
lengthy
record
inevitably
less
time
opportunity
determine
whether
lawyers
done
exceptionally
fine
job
yet
less
suited
performing
inquiry
accordingly
determining
whether
fee
enhancement
warranted
given
case
matter
committed
sound
discretion
trial
judge
ante
function
appellate
courts
review
judge
determination
abuse
discretion
see
pierce
underwood
see
also
general
elec
joiner
eference
hallmark
review
case
well
illustrates
tiered
functionally
specialized
judicial
system
places
task
determining
attorney
fee
award
primarily
district
hands
plaintiffs
lawyers
spent
eight
years
investigating
underlying
facts
developing
initial
complaint
conducting
proceedings
working
final
relief
district
docket
entries
consists
pages
transcripts
hearings
depositions
along
documents
produced
record
fills
large
boxes
neither
appellate
panel
easily
read
entire
record
attempt
district
judge
aware
many
intangible
matters
written
page
reflect
review
expansive
record
possibly
exhaustive
portions
record
reviewed
lead
conclude
like
appeals
district
judge
abuse
discretion
awarding
enhanced
fee
reach
conclusion
based
four
considerations
first
record
indicates
lawyers
objective
case
unusually
important
fully
consistent
central
objectives
basic
federal
statute
moreover
problem
attorneys
faced
demanded
exceptionally
high
degree
skill
effort
specifically
lawyers
clients
sought
state
georgia
reform
entire
system
system
much
record
describes
well
level
minimal
constitutional
acceptability
record
contains
investigative
reports
mostly
prepared
georgia
office
child
advocate
show
example
following
state
system
unable
provide
essential
medical
mental
health
services
children
consequently
unnecessarily
suffered
illness
life
long
medical
disabilities
permanent
hearing
loss
due
failures
part
state
administer
basic
care
antibiotics
see
doc
exh
pp
understaffing
improper
staffing
placed
children
care
individuals
dangerous
criminal
records
children
physically
assaulted
staff
locked
outside
shelters
night
punishment
abused
ways
see
doc
pp
doc
exh
pp
doc
exh
pp
doc
exh
pp
shelters
unsanitary
dilapidated
unclean
infested
rats
overcrowded
unsafe
control
see
doc
exh
doc
exh
doc
due
improper
supervision
deficiencies
shelters
children
abused
drugs
also
became
victims
child
prostitution
see
doc
exh
systemic
failures
also
caused
vulnerable
children
suffer
regular
beatings
sexual
abuse
including
rape
hands
aggressive
shelter
residents
see
doc
doc
exh
doc
exh
child
beaten
badly
eight
children
suffered
severe
internal
bleeding
describing
violent
sexual
assault
rape
surprisingly
many
children
upwards
per
day
per
year
tried
escape
conditions
others
tried
commit
suicide
see
doc
doc
exh
seal
least
children
run
away
shelters
doc
exh
pp
seal
daily
logs
see
also
doc
exh
describing
suicide
attempts
docket
entries
hereinafter
refer
nd
case
state
office
child
advocate
whose
reports
provide
much
basis
foregoing
description
concluded
system
operating
crisis
mode
private
operator
ran
system
never
licensed
care
children
office
child
advocate
protection
children
ann
record
doc
exh
hereinafter
oca
report
accord
exh
advocate
noted
neither
investigative
reports
national
news
publicity
including
television
program
highlighted
foster
child
death
beatings
prompted
corrective
action
state
oca
report
advocate
stated
litigation
necessary
force
reform
repeatedly
asked
state
give
office
authority
conduct
litigation
see
office
child
advocate
advisory
committee
ann
effectiveness
online
http
internet
materials
visited
apr
available
clerk
case
file
office
truly
effective
must
possess
authority
compel
change
initiate
litigation
behalf
children
authority
widely
considered
child
advocates
crucial
effecting
meaningful
change
children
office
child
advocate
advisory
committee
ann
effectiveness
online
http
office
child
advocate
advisory
committee
ann
effectiveness
online
http
state
grant
child
advocate
office
litigating
authority
sought
see
laws
codified
code
ann
upshot
plaintiffs
attorneys
child
advocate
initiated
lawsuit
thereby
assumed
role
attorney
filling
enforcement
void
state
legal
system
function
congress
considered
highest
priority
newman
piggie
park
enterprises
per
curiam
meant
promote
enacting
texas
state
teachers
assn
garland
independent
school
second
course
lawsuit
lengthy
arduous
plaintiffs
lawyers
began
factual
investigations
beyond
child
advocate
already
conducted
see
record
docs
partially
seal
filed
suit
state
met
plaintiffs
efforts
host
complex
procedural
well
substantive
objections
state
example
argued
law
forbade
plaintiffs
investigate
shelters
eve
decision
might
approved
investigations
state
removed
case
federal
state
sought
protective
orders
preventing
attorneys
speaking
shelters
staff
losing
motions
state
delayed
point
district
forced
admonish
state
defendants
technical
legal
objections
discovery
requests
order
delay
hinder
discovery
process
supp
nd
quoting
record
doc
see
also
doc
doc
pp
docs
meantime
state
moved
dismissal
basing
motion
complex
legal
doctrines
younger
abstention
doctrine
district
found
inapplicable
nd
see
younger
harris
rooker
fidelity
trust
district
columbia
appeals
feldman
state
also
opposed
petitioners
request
certify
class
children
foster
care
district
rejected
state
argument
state
filed
lengthy
motion
summary
judgment
record
docs
plaintiffs
attorneys
opposed
thorough
briefing
supported
comprehensive
exhibits
see
docs
losing
motion
eventually
agreeing
mediation
state
forced
protracted
litigation
mediator
see
docs
told
opposing
plaintiffs
efforts
system
reformed
state
spent
million
outside
counsel
charge
state
reduced
rates
worked
significantly
hours
figure
alone
indicates
tapped
law
department
additional
hours
work
supp
third
face
opposition
results
obtained
plaintiffs
attorneys
appear
exceptional
consent
decree
negotiated
course
mediation
sets
forth
specific
steps
state
take
order
address
specific
deficiencies
sort
described
see
see
also
app
consent
decree
establishes
reporting
oversight
mechanism
backed
district
enforcement
authority
see
supp
result
decree
state
agreed
comprehensive
reforms
system
benefit
children
many
different
communities
informed
observers
described
decree
brought
significant
positive
results
see
record
doc
recent
overseers
report
state
overall
performance
continues
trend
steady
improvement
detailing
substantial
health
safety
welfare
improvements
see
also
office
child
advocate
ann
report
letter
tom
rawlings
child
advocate
sonny
perdue
governor
georgia
online
http
generally
pleased
direction
state
child
welfare
system
cf
weinstein
weinstein
late
neuropsychological
consequences
child
neglect
implications
law
social
policy
reform
describing
general
broad
social
impact
dysfunctional
systems
quoting
national
institute
health
research
child
neglect
online
http
see
record
doc
noting
areas
georgia
system
still
needs
improvement
fourth
finally
district
judge
supervised
proceedings
saw
plaintiffs
amass
process
compile
convincingly
present
vast
amounts
factual
information
witnessed
defeat
numerous
state
procedural
substantive
motions
position
evaluate
ultimate
mediation
effort
said
mediation
effort
case
went
far
beyond
anything
seen
previous
case
supp
based
personal
observation
plaintiffs
counsel
performance
throughout
litigation
finds
counsel
brought
higher
degree
skill
commitment
dedication
professionalism
litigation
seen
displayed
attorneys
case
years
bench
consent
decree
provided
extraordinary
benefits
plaintiff
class
settlement
achieved
plaintiffs
counsel
comprehensive
scope
detailed
coverage
years
practicing
attorney
federal
judge
unaware
case
plaintiff
class
achieved
favorable
result
comprehensive
scale
based
observations
assessment
attorneys
performance
course
litigation
district
concluded
evidence
establishes
quality
service
rendered
class
counsel
far
superior
consumers
legal
services
legal
marketplace
reasonably
expect
receive
rates
used
lodestar
calculation
basis
read
believe
assessment
correct
recognize
ordinary
lodestar
calculation
yields
large
fee
award
assessment
lodestar
calculation
case
translates
average
hourly
fee
per
attorney
see
lodestar
calculation
attorney
hours
majority
reference
hourly
fee
ante
refers
rate
associated
single
highest
paid
attorneys
enhanced
fee
average
hourly
rate
lodestar
lay
reader
also
bear
mind
lawyer
fee
substantially
greater
profit
given
attorneys
must
sometimes
cover
costs
case
exceeded
see
supp
also
must
cover
routine
overhead
expenses
typically
consume
fees
see
altman
weil
publications
survey
law
firm
economics
per
hour
lodestar
compensate
group
attorneys
district
described
extraordinary
rate
lower
average
rate
charged
attorneys
practicing
law
state
georgia
average
hourly
rate
see
accordingly
even
majority
seem
acknowledge
form
enhancement
appropriate
case
see
ante
enhancement
may
appropriate
method
used
determining
hourly
rate
employed
lodestar
calculation
adequately
measure
attorney
true
market
value
demonstrated
part
litigation
indeed
fact
exceptional
results
achieved
case
much
work
ante
performed
relatively
inexperienced
attorneys
accordingly
compensated
lodestar
market
average
ibid
reason
think
service
rendered
outstanding
performance
worthy
enhancement
comparison
district
enhanced
award
special
adjustment
unique
exceptional
case
compensate
attorneys
one
occasion
average
hourly
rate
comparable
rates
charged
nation
leading
law
firms
average
every
occasion
see
sampling
billing
rates
nationwide
national
law
journal
listing
firms
average
hourly
rate
barnett
certification
drag
opinion
puzzle
transactional
curiosities
iowa
numbers
probably
underestimate
given
many
national
law
firms
decline
take
part
national
law
journal
survey
thus
appear
enhanced
award
wholly
consistent
purpose
enacted
ensure
counsel
prevailing
parties
paid
traditional
attorneys
compensated
client
see
ivil
rights
plaintiffs
singled
different
less
favorable
treatment
see
also
blum
event
circumstances
listed
likely
make
rare
exceptional
case
warranting
enhanced
fee
award
certainly
make
clear
neither
unreasonable
abuse
discretion
district
reach
conclusion
indeed
facts
circumstances
described
even
roughly
correct
fair
ask
exceptional
case
disagreement
limited
stated
outset
complete
agreement
respect
answer
question
presented
increase
lodestar
due
superior
performance
results
permitted
extraordinary
circumstances
ante
unlike
justice
thomas
read
opinion
advance
attorney
fees
jurisprudence
along
decisional
arc
toward
point
enhancements
virtually
barred
cases
ante
concurring
opinion
prior
cases
make
clear
enhancements
permitted
cases
delaware
valley
attorney
achieves
exceptional
success
hensley
see
also
blum
definition
exceptional
circumstances
occur
rarely
see
ante
kennedy
concurring
see
advance
fee
enhancement
jurisprudence
discourage
lodestar
enhancements
without
overruling
precedents
cited
done
contrary
today
reaffirm
precedents
allow
enhancements
exceptional
performance
ante
respect
central
holding
unanimous
disagreement
absolute
respect
proper
resolution
case
us
purport
prohibit
district
awarding
enhanced
fee
remand
provides
detailed
reasoning
supporting
decision
ante
cf
tr
oral
arg
majority
disagree
respect
disturb
judgment
request
attorney
fees
result
second
major
litigation
hensley
lead
years
protracted
appellate
review
see
brennan
concurring
part
dissenting
part
grant
certiorari
case
consider
dispute
whether
fact
exceptional
case
merits
lodestar
enhancement
district
already
resolved
question
appeals
affirmed
judgment
found
abuse
discretion
content
resolve
question
presented
even
follow
inclination
say
hold
principles
upon
agree
including
applicability
review
district
fee
determination
require
us
affirm
judgment
footnotes
justice
breyer
us
answer
question
yes
end
opinion
see
post
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
opinion
little
use
bench
bar
pointlessly
invite
additional
round
litigation
issue
standards
applied
granting
enhancement
fairly
subsumed
within
question
agreed
decide
extensively
discussed
briefs
filed
case
title
provides
action
proceeding
enforce
provision
sections
title
title
ix
public
law
religious
freedom
restoration
act
religious
land
use
institutionalized
persons
act
title
vi
civil
rights
act
section
title
discretion
may
allow
prevailing
party
reasonable
attorney
fee
part
costs
citations
omitted
virtually
identical
language
appears
many
federal
statutes
see
burlington
dague
factors
time
labor
required
novelty
difficulty
questions
skill
requisite
perform
legal
service
properly
preclusion
employment
attorney
due
acceptance
case
customary
fee
whether
fee
fixed
contingent
time
limitations
imposed
client
circumstances
amount
involved
results
obtained
experience
reputation
ability
attorneys
case
nature
length
professional
relationship
client
awards
similar
cases
hensley
eckerhart
respondents
correctly
note
attorney
brilliant
insights
critical
maneuvers
sometimes
matter
far
hours
worked
years
experience
brief
respondents
said
blum
stenson
cases
special
skill
experience
counsel
reflected
reasonableness
hourly
rates
see
salazar
district
columbia
supp
dc
laffey
northwest
airlines
supp
dc
aff
part
rev
part
cadc
justice
breyer
reliance
average
hourly
rate
respondents
attorneys
highly
misleading
see
post
calculating
lodestar
district
found
hourly
rate
attorneys
eminently
fair
reasonable
consistent
prevailing
market
rates
atlanta
comparable
work
supp
justice
breyer
calculation
average
hourly
rate
attorney
hours
reflects
nothing
fact
much
work
performed
attorneys
whose
fair
reasonable
market
rate
market
average
nothing
unfair
compensating
attorneys
rate
requested
justice
breyer
opinion
dramatically
illustrates
danger
allowing
trial
judge
award
huge
enhancement
supported
discernible
methodology
approach
retain
million
enhancement
respondents
attorneys
earn
much
attorneys
richest
law
firms
country
post
fees
paid
taxpayers
georgia
annual
per
capita
income
less
see
dept
commerce
bureau
census
statistical
abstract
table
figures
annual
salaries
attorneys
employed
state
range
lawyers
highest
paid
division
chief
see
brief
state
alabama
et
al
amici
curiae
citing
national
association
attorneys
general
statistics
office
attorney
general
fiscal
year
pp
section
enacted
ensure
civil
rights
plaintiffs
adequately
represented
provide
windfall