In Re Microstrategy, Inc. Securities Litigation

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “arithmetic calculations aid the fee-setting process, but ultimately a trial court’s judgment is centrally important and may trump the calculations”
• concluding that $555 per hour for a senior partner and $220 per hour for a junior associate in 2001 were rates “not inconsistent with the rates charged by lawyers in large, prominent, and ... expert law firms”
• explaining that courts using the percentage method “reference the same case-specific factors many courts use to adjust, or determine a multiplier for, a lodestar figure.”
• explaining that courts using the percentage method “reference the same case-specific factors many courts use to adjust, or determine a multiplier for, a lodestar figure.”
• noting that “arithmetic calculations aid the fee-setting process, but ultimately a trial court's judgment is centrally important and may trump the calculations”
• reducing fee award from a requested percentage, which would have resulted in an award approximately four times the lodestar figure, to a percentage that resulted in an award 2.6 times the lodestar figure

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).