12/14 - Litigating an Attorney's Fee Claim (Indianapolis)

Sponsored by
Back to TopPrintE-mail
Friday  December 14, 2012 

This CLE program covers nearly all aspects of attorney's fee litigation under various statutes such as 42 U.S.C. § 1988, the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), and Indiana's Adult Wrongful Death statute (AWDS) pursuant to McCabe v. Commissioner Dept. of Ins. 949 N.E.2d 816 (Ind. 2011). This program will cover such topics as establishing prevailing party status and fee liability, requirements of keeping time, methods of calculating fees and hourly rates, and recovering litigation expenses. We will also address many defenses and pitfalls in prosecuting fee claims, such as out-of-town rates, utilization of multiple attorneys, and availability of fees where little to no damages are recovered.

Date: Friday, December 14, 2012

Credit hours: 6.0 CLE / 1.0 Ethics Hours

Cost: $230
ACLU of Indiana supporting member discounts available

Location: American Red Cross
441 E. 10th St., Indianapolis 46202

Provider: ACLU of Indiana

Contact information:
Kandy Kendall
(317) 635-4059 x103
kkendall@aclu-in.org

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT