- 22 -
justifies an award of attorney’s fees at a rate greater than the
statutory limit.
Regarding the time devoted by Mr. Gardner to this case, we
find that the 4.5 hours spent by him in 1999 in meeting with
petitioner, reviewing the notice of deficiency and related
documentation, and preparing the petition for filing is
reasonable.
We also find that 1.0 hour of Mr. Gardner’s time (0.5 hour
in 1999 and 0.5 hour in 2000) was reasonably devoted to the
period between the filing of the petition and the filing of the
motion for costs. This total consists of the reasonable time
spent in reading respondent’s answer (which conceded the
deficiency), reading and responding to respondent’s
correspondence, and finalizing the form of decision, as revised.
In addition, we find that 9.5 hours of Mr. Gardner’s time
were reasonably devoted to prosecuting petitioner’s motion for
costs in 2000 and 2001. This total consists of the reasonable
time spent in preparing the motion, evaluating respondent’s
Response, preparing the Additional Affidavit pursuant to Rule
232(d), preparing the Reply to respondent’s Response as directed
by the Court, evaluating respondent’s Reply, and participating in
the Court-initiated telephone conference and related negotiations
in January 2001.
Finally, we find that petitioner is entitled to recover the
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011