We thank our friends at National Association of Legal Fee Analysis (NALFA) for providing us a couple of recent posts of interest, which we summarize below.
Big Firm $5 Million Bill In Pumping Rate Case Was A Surprise.
Based on a recent Los Angeles Times story entitled “Water District Found Itself Drowning in Steep Legal Fees,” the Water Replenishment District of Southern California (WRD) tapped Latham & Watkins to defend a lawsuit by certain cities over WRD’s pumping rates. Over a 10-month period, Latham billed WRD more than $5 million in legal fees—more than $1 million more that what the cities were charged by their attorneys over 5 years. WRD settled the case with the cities, but did exceed its 2014-2015 $2 billion budget by almost double according to WRD officials.
“Investors beware!” Louis Dalrymple, artist. Puck, 1901. Library of Congress. “Illustration shows investors drowning in rough seas labeled ‘Wall Street,’ and ‘Speculation,’ and a tophat labeled ‘Ingenuous Investor’ caught in a whirlpool labeled ‘Iron and Steel Trust.’”
Recent Patent Fee Award Study Has Some Interesting Insights On Litigation Costs/Fee Awards.
NALFA, with permission, posted a recent study of patent litigation fee awards for 2003-2013 time frame, with the study spearheaded by Saurabh Vishnubhakat (and apparently published in the Duke Law Journal). Here are some highlights from the study results:
*For 2013, here are the expenses incurred in patent litigation (fees and costs): $700,000 – exposure under $1 million; $2 million – exposure between $1-10 million; $3.325 million – exposure between $10-25 million; and $5.5 million – exposure over $25 million.
*Patent fee awards broke down 71% to plaintiffs and 29% to defendants.
*For the 2003-2013 period, in section 285 “exceptional” cases under the patent fee-shifting provision, the median fee award was $46,354 to plaintiffs and $109,466 to defendants, with defendants getting more than 2.4-fold greater awards than plaintiffs.
*Here are the district level courts producing the most fee awards during the 2003-2013 time frame: C.D.Cal.; N.D.Cal.; N.D.Ill.; S.D.Cal.; N.D.Ga.; and E.D.Tex.
