Supremes Allow Paralegal Fees Recovery At Market Rates
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.03.08
Reversing contrary Board and Federal Circuit rulings, the Supreme Court in Richlin Sec. Serv. Co. v. Chertoff (June 2, 2008, http://www.supreme courtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-1717.pdf) unanimously ruled that the Equal Access to Justice Act allows a client to recover market rate paralegal fees charged to the client, not just the cost of the paralegal to the attorney retained by the client. The Supreme Court ruled that paralegal fees are implied in the term "attorneys fees" in the statute and are subject to the same per-hour limitations.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.25.26
DOJ Signals Increased Antitrust Scrutiny of Algorithmic Pricing in Willow Bridge Decision
Algorithmic pricing tools commonly used by businesses to increase efficiency and profits are under increasing antitrust scrutiny. This summer, federal regulators, state attorneys general, and state legislatures grappled with competing businesses providing nonpublic, competitively sensitive data to common algorithmic platforms. The Third Circuit deepened an emerging circuit split with the Ninth Circuit on algorithmic pricing liability, reviving antitrust claims against Atlantic City casino-hotels in a decision with direct implications for any company that uses a common pricing platform. See Crowell’s recent client alert. And New Jersey enacted two landmark laws—the FAIR Act and the Fair Price Protection Act—directly regulating algorithmic rent-setting and surveillance pricing. See Crowell’s recent client alert.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.25.26
Recent Court Decision Highlights Effectiveness of “Second Bite” Protests
Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.21.26
FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing: What Businesses Need to Know
