- 62 -
between the amounts we had paid him and the reasonable
fees he was awarded by the Court.
Those representations are consistent with the inclusion of Izen’s
hourly billing rate in his flat-fee appellate contracts. We
therefore conclude that each such contract encompasses an
“implied agreement that * * * [any] fee award will be paid over
to the legal representative”, id. at 1583, to the extent the
client’s share of the award exceeds the amount paid by the client
pursuant to the contract. In this manner, the contracts supply
the additional payment obligations that support an award of the
potentially recoverable amount in its entirety.
2. Jones Fee Request
As indicated above, the Jones petitioners actually base the
amount of their fee request ($133,136.50) on the aggregate
payments received by Jones from his nontest case petitioner
clients between August 16, 1999 and May 27, 2003. Disregarding
(1) amounts received prior to the period of the appeal, (2)
amounts received from persons for whom the Jones petitioners have
not submitted net worth affidavits, and (3) amounts received from
persons who had settled their cases prior to the appeal, the
remaining amount (in excess of $84,000) still far exceeds the
reasonable fees ($20,147.90) and expenses ($3,042.44) with
respect to the Jones fee request. Accordingly, we conclude that
eligible persons have paid the potentially recoverable amount
($23,190.34) in its entirety.
Page: Previous 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011