- 19 -
petitioner’s attorneys; (2) the hourly rates charged by
petitioner’s attorneys are consistent with the hourly rates
prevailing in the community for the type of work involved, as
demonstrated by the affidavits of Connecticut tax attorneys
Samuel M. Hurwitz and Mark G. Sklarz; (3) petitioner’s attorneys
possessed expertise in both tax law and relevant Massachusetts
commercial law; (4) the representation of petitioner was made
more difficult by respondent’s changing legal theory during the
court proceeding; (5) the effectiveness of petitioner’s
representation is demonstrated by the Court’s holding in
Coburn I; and (6) respondent rejected numerous offers from
petitioner to settle the matter.
We conclude that petitioner has not established that there
was a limited availability of qualified attorneys for the instant
proceedings, that there was a limited availability of tax
expertise, or that the issues presented in Coburn I were of
sufficient difficulty to qualify as a special factor under
section 7430(c)(1)(B)(iii). Accordingly, we limit the award of
the aforementioned attorney’s fees to the statutory rate of $150
per hour.
Finally, we turn to our analysis of whether the amount of
costs petitioner seeks is reasonable. Those claimed costs
include (1) fees of $608.50 for the services of paralegals,
clerks, and law clerks and (2) disbursements of $6,074.81.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011