[textbook]Traversing the Ethical Minefield Problems, Law, and Professional Responsibility by Susan R. Martyn (z-lib.org)(1) (1)

Moore, which settled the suit for $500,000. What fee is Martyn & Fox entitled to collect,
and from whom?
E. Statutory Fees Model Rule 1.5 RLGL § 38
Statutes and regulations control the amount of the fee in an increasing numbers of cases.
Some statutes, like the Social Security Act, directly control the amount and calculation of
the fee. Others, such as the federal Equal Access to Justice Act, provide for fee shifting; that
is, the statute specifically entitles a prevailing plaintiff to recover “reasonable fees and
expenses of attorneys” directly from an unsuccessful defendant. 1 These provisions
encourage private attorneys general to assist in enforcing a statutory policy, such as
securities, antitrust, environmental, and civil rights laws. 2
The next case, Perdue, indicates that the Supreme Court has presumptively equated a
“reasonable fee” in these federal fee-shifting statutes with a lodestar method of calculation
(reasonable hourly rate times reasonable number of hours expended). 3
Every state has its own variety of statutes, regulations, and case law that control lawyers’
fees, both in certain kinds of representations such as workers’ compensation, and by
providing for fee shifting in statutory actions such as consumer or securities fraud. 4 Each
jurisdiction has developed its own jurisprudence about the definition of a “reasonable
attorney’s fee” under these statutes.
Courts also gain jurisdiction over lawyers’ fees because of common law and rule-based
obligations. In class actions, court approval is required for fees if the fee is part of a
common fund settlement. 5 The Supreme Court has not yet resolved a circuit split about
the appropriate method of determining fees in these cases. 6 Bankruptcy law requires
judicial approval of lawyers’ fees because the court supervises the costs of administering the
estate. In state courts, lawyers serving as fiduciaries also are subject to the power of a
probate court to examine and approve expenditures from an estate. In cases that involve
persons who lack legal capacity, courts also have a responsibility to approve fees as part of
their parens patriae power to protect the ward (recall Spaulding, Chapter 6).
Perdue v. Kenny A.
559 U.S. 542 (2010)
Justice ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case presents the question whether the calculation of an attorney’s fee, under
federal fee-shifting statutes, based on the “lodestar,” i.e., the number of hours worked
multiplied by the prevailing hourly rates, may be increased due to superior performance
and results. We have stated in previous cases that such an increase is permitted in
extraordinary circumstances, and we reaffirm that rule. But as we have also said in prior
cases, there is a strong presumption that the lodestar is sufficient; factors subsumed in the
394