Sentences with phrase «opinion on attorney fee»
«News and opinion on attorney fee and legal billing jurisprudence.»
http://www.abajournal.com/ Not exact matches
I agree to indemnify, hold harmless and release Judd Foundation, its directors, officers, employees, members, managers, affiliate, agents and contractors from any and all claims, liabilities, loss, damages, costs and expense of any kind whatsoever (including reasonable attorneys fees) by myself or any other person, entity, or corporation, and covenant not to sue or make any other claim because of the Foundation's decision to include or exclude a submitted work from the catalogue raisonné or its refusal to render an opinion on authorship.
As laid out in the appellate opinion, plaintiff ‟ s counsel and defendants ‟ counsel agreed to multiple extensions of plaintiff ‟ s time to file a motion for attorney fees on appeal, while they were trying to settle the amount owed.
-- authored by Circuit Judge Hurwitz [majority decision] and concurring opinion by Circuit Judge Reinhardt; discussed in our Oct. 10, 2015 post: District court in Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act case which substantially reduced fee request was reversed based upon its reliance on inapt practice area hourly rates, upon its discounts for plaintiff's attorneys not delegating tasks to associates given that only small firms prosecuted these type of cases, and upon its use of stale prior fee awards involving fee claimant's attorneys.
Considering that the same district court allowed Apple to leverage a couple of recent Supreme Court opinions concerning fee - shifting in connection with its pursuit of a recovery of attorneys» fees from Samsung, it would seem just fair for Samsung to be allowed to make an Alice argument now, just in time before Judge Lucy Koh will decide on the parties» motions for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) following the recent $ 119 million jury verdict (which was disappointing enough for Apple to request a retrial).
A couple of interesting things are happening in yesterday's Court of Appeals opinion in Bodkin v. Bodkin, 388 S.C. 203, 694 S.E. 2d 230 (2010), which, with one small modification, affirms the decision of the family court on disputes over the grounds for divorce, alimony, property division and attorney's fees.
On July 23, 2015, the Virginia Standing Committee on Legal Ethics issued an opinion (LEO 1883) indicating that it was proper for Chapter 7 bankruptcy attorneys to take in the entirety of fixed fees for work in a Chapter 7 case before filing it as long as the disclosure is made in the bankruptcy paperOn July 23, 2015, the Virginia Standing Committee on Legal Ethics issued an opinion (LEO 1883) indicating that it was proper for Chapter 7 bankruptcy attorneys to take in the entirety of fixed fees for work in a Chapter 7 case before filing it as long as the disclosure is made in the bankruptcy paperon Legal Ethics issued an opinion (LEO 1883) indicating that it was proper for Chapter 7 bankruptcy attorneys to take in the entirety of fixed fees for work in a Chapter 7 case before filing it as long as the disclosure is made in the bankruptcy papers.
Recently, in a «rare» discovery - related opinion, the Supreme Court weighed in on the limits of inherent authority to award attorney's fees and costs as a sanction for discovery misconduct.
Prof. Conduct 123 (2001)(subject to the operational structure and content described in the opinion, a lawyer may affiliate with an online legal services website); Nebraska Op. 07 - 05 (lawyer may participate in internet lawyer directory which identifies itself as a directory, disclaims being a referral service and only lists basic information about lawyers without recommending specific lawyers and charges a reasonable, flat annual advertising fee); New Jersey Committee on Attorney Advertising Op. 36 (2006)(lawyer may pay flat fee to internet marketing company for exclusive website listing for particular county in specific practice area if listing includes prominent, unmistakable disclaimer stating the listings are paid advertisements and not endorsements or authorized referrals); North Carolina Op. 2004 - 1 (lawyer may participate in for - profit online service that is a hybrid referral service - legal directory, provided there is no fee - sharing with the service and communications are truthful); Oregon Op. 2007 - 180 (2007)(lawyer may pay nationwide internet referral service for listing if listing is not false or misleading and does not imply that the lawyer can represent clients outside jurisdictions of the lawyer's license, fee is not based on number of referrals, retained clients or revenue generated by listing and the service does not exercise discretion in matching clients with lawyers); Rhode Island 2005 - 01 (permitting website that enables lawyers to post information about their services and respond to anonymous requests for legal services in exchange for flat annual membership fee if website exercises no discretion over which requests lawyers may access); South Carolina 01 - 03 (lawyer may pay internet advertising service fee determined by the number of «hits» that the service produces for the lawyer provided that the service does not steer business to any particular lawyer and the payments are not based on whether user ultimately becomes a client); Texas Op. 573 (2006)(lawyer may participate in for - profit internet service that matches potential clients and lawyers if selection process is fully automated and performed by computers without the exercise of human discretion); Virginia Advertising Op.