Capson v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that time spent reviewing simple aspects of Fourth Circuit procedure is not properly billed to the client where counsels’ experience was basis for their hourly rate
• recognizing that lack of experience in a particular field can affect the lodestar determination
• explaining that “the burden is on the party seeking the fee award to establish the reasonableness of the hours spent”
• imposing a reduction of the fees awarded when it was “impossible . . . to cull in detail the justified from the unjustified”
• allowing only 420 hours of over 1,400 hours claimed for an appeal
• “We have already observed that it is inappropriate to charge defendants for duplicative endeavors and overkill on the part of newly acquired counsel.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).