- 45 -
devoted to fee request preparation, which approximates the 36
hours Izen separately claims to have devoted to that task.32 We
therefore conclude that the 36 hours separately referenced in
Izen’s latest affidavit are accounted for in the initial fee
request (28.5 hours) and his new claim for May 12, 2005 (8.0
hours). Disallowance of the duplicate claim for 36 hours, as
well as the duplicate claim for 7.33 hours on May 10, 2005,
results in a downward adjustment of 43.33 hours.
h. Miscellaneous Additional Adjustments
We have identified an additional 23 time entries (only 3 of
which exceed 0.33 hours) that either (1) pertain to matters that
are unrelated to, or are only marginally related to, the
appellate proceedings or the Izen fee request, or (2) are
insufficiently descriptive to establish the required nexus. The
first category includes two entries relating to the Izen/Jones
motion for trial fees that we ruled on in Dixon IV and three
entries relating to parallel State tax proceedings. The second
category includes unexplained references such as “letter
requesting trust documents from Darrell Hatcher” and “handwritten
32 Izen actually claims that the 36 undated hours relate to
both preparation of the fee request and “responding to
Respondent’s objections to the application”. We note that Izen
separately claims--and we allow in full--18.16 hours on Dec. 1
and 2, 2005, relating to the Izen petitioners’ “Supplemental
Response”, which responds to respondent’s opposition to the fee
request.
Page: Previous 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011