- 8 -
which included the question of the possibility of the partition
of Louisiana realty. There is no limitation that permissible
attorney fees under section 7430(c)(1)(B)(iii) can be recovered
only for attorneys who make an entry of appearance in the
controversy. Nor do we find that it was unreasonable for the
estates to use such expertise. Accordingly, we hold that the
estates are entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees under
section 7430(c)(1)(B)(iii).
Regarding the question of reasonableness under section
7430(c)(1)(B)(iii), the Jones firm’s fees must be subjected to
the adjusted statutory hourly rate unless there is a showing that
the subject matter of this case involved complex matters
requiring special legal skills. In that regard, Attorney
Benjamin’s qualifications were not tested, and he was not
accepted or rejected as an “expert” by the Court. Furthermore,
the estates have not established and/or argued that the nine
individuals from the Jones firm had the type of expertise that
would warrant fees in excess of the adjusted statutory hourly
rate. We accordingly hold that the reasonable or recoverable
fees of the Jones firm must be limited to the adjusted statutory
hourly rate, a task that we leave to the parties under the
operation of Rule 155.
The estates’ secondary or alternative approach is to claim
that any portion of the Jones firm’s fees not allowed as attorney
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011