- 47 -
to the Court, and appearances. Based in part on the costs of
living and attorney wages in San Jose, California, respondent
asks reimbursement at a rate of $125 an hour for Mr. Webb’s time.
The hourly rate properly charged for the time of a Government
attorney is the "amount to which attorneys of like skill in the
area would typically be entitled for a given type of work on the
basis of an hourly rate of compensation." Harper v.
Commissioner, 99 T.C. at 551. Petitioners and Ms. Sluyter have
made no response to the order to show cause. We have no reason
to believe that $125 an hour is not a reasonable hourly charge
for Mr. Webb’s time or that 56.75 is not the number of excess
hours Mr. Webb expended on this litigation. We are familiar with
the procedural and factual history of this case and believe that
56.75 hours was reasonably necessary for Mr. Webb to do the work
he described. See United States v. $12,248 U.S. Currency, 957
F.2d 1513, 1520 (9th Cir. 1992). We find that $125 is a
reasonable hourly charge for Mr. Webb’s time and 56.75 is the
number of excess hours he reasonably expended on this litigation.
The lodestar amount for Mr. Webb’s time is $7,093.75.
Respondent asks reimbursement for 10.25 hours of Ms. Zusi’s
time, at a rate of $200 an hour. Ms. Zusi is the abusive trust
coordinating attorney for the Central California District of the
IRS. She has practiced law for more than 15 years, both with
District Counsel and as a trial attorney and Assistant U.S.
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011