Motion for Attorneys' Fees
Draft a post-judgment fee motion establishing prevailing party status, applying the lodestar method, and presenting a documented fee petition.
Prerequisites
- Final judgment or order establishing prevailing party status
- Fee-shifting authority — statute (e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 1988), contract, or common law basis
- Contemporaneous time records for all timekeepers
- Timekeeper qualifications (CVs, specializations, recognitions)
- Rate evidence — recent fee awards, bar surveys, market data
- Case docket and procedural history
- Local rules on formatting, page limits, and filing deadlines
Quick Start
- Confirm fee-shifting basis and prevailing party status from judgment
- Collect time records, rate evidence, and timekeeper credentials
- Calculate lodestar: reasonable hours × reasonable rate
- Document billing judgment (excluded time) to build credibility
- Draft motion following the section structure below
- Prepare supporting declaration and exhibit index
Motion Structure
I. Caption & Compliance
- Full court name, division, case number, party designations
- Title: "Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees [and Costs]"
- TOC/TOA if required; verify local formatting rules
II. Introduction
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Moving party | Name + prevailing party identification |
| Fee authority | Statutory citation or contract clause (verbatim) |
| Judgment reference | Date, holdings, relief granted |
| Total fees sought | Dollar amount with breakdown |
| Roadmap | Authority → rates → hours → results |
III. Litigation Narrative
Chronological narrative emphasizing fee-reasonableness factors:
- Nature of dispute — claims, defenses, stakes
- Procedural milestones with dates — motions (with outcomes), discovery, depositions, trial
- Complexity indicators — novel issues, document volume, expert witnesses, party count
- Opposing conduct increasing work — cite specific orders/correspondence
- Quality of representation — favorable outcomes, results achieved
IV. Legal Standard
Present in this order:
- Fee-shifting authority — quote statutory/contractual language verbatim
- Prevailing party test — jurisdiction-specific; address Buckhannon for settlement-based recovery
- Lodestar method — Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983)
- Johnson factors — if adopted; Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, 488 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974) [VERIFY]
- Lodestar enhancements — Perdue v. Kenny A., 559 U.S. 542 (2010)
- Fee allocation — Hensley common-core-of-facts doctrine for partial success
- Fees-on-fees — authority for time spent on the fee motion itself
V. Prevailing Party Analysis
- Quote judgment establishing favorable outcome
- Apply jurisdiction's test to specific findings
- Address degree of success relative to fees sought
- If settlement: address catalyst theory / consent decree applicability
- Preempt limited-success arguments
VI. Lodestar Calculation
A. Rate Justification — for each timekeeper:
| Timekeeper | Role | Years | Rate | Market Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Name] | Partner | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] |
| [Name] | Associate | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] |
| [Name] | Paralegal | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] |
Support with: comparable fee awards, bar survey data, attorney qualifications.
B. Hours by Phase
| Phase | Hours | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Case assessment & pleadings | Complexity, investigation scope | |
| Written discovery | Volume, disputes | |
| Document review | Document count, privilege review | |
| Depositions | Witness count, preparation | |
| Motion practice | Per-motion breakdown with outcomes | |
| Expert work | Retention, reports | |
| Settlement/mediation | Sessions, preparation | |
| Trial preparation | Witnesses, exhibits | |
| Trial/hearing | Days in court | |
| Post-judgment | Fee motion, enforcement | |
| Total |
C. Billing Judgment — document excluded time:
- Clerical tasks at professional rates
- Duplicative research or learning curve
- Error correction
- Quantify hours excluded per category
D. Staffing Appropriateness — routine tasks to associates/paralegals; justify senior time on routine work.
E. Enhancement (if sought) — multiplier, basis (exceptional results, contingent risk, complexity), jurisdiction-specific authority, inadequacy of base lodestar.
VII. Supporting Declaration
Numbered-paragraph declaration under penalty of perjury:
- ¶¶ 1–3: Declarant qualifications, role, personal knowledge
- ¶¶ 4–6: Time record authentication — contemporaneous, accurate
- ¶¶ 7–9: Billing judgment — categories excluded, amounts
- ¶¶ 10–12: Rate reasonableness — customary rates, market consistency
- ¶¶ 13–15: Hours reasonableness — necessity, complexity, staffing
- ¶¶ 16+: Additional timekeepers (qualifications, rates)
- Execution block: venue, date, signature, notarization if required
Consider supplemental declarations: peer rate affidavits, client value declaration.
VIII. Exhibits
| Exhibit | Contents |
|---|---|
| A | Detailed time records (date, timekeeper, hours, description) |
| B | Judgment/order establishing prevailing party status |
| C | Fee-shifting statute or contract provision |
| D | Timekeeper resumes/CVs |
| E | Market rate evidence (fee awards, surveys) |
| F | Comparable fee award orders |
| G | Key orders showing complexity/opposing conduct |
Redact work product from time entries; explain redactions in declaration.
IX. Prayer for Relief
- Attorneys' fees: $[amount] (lodestar) [+ enhancement = $[total]]
- Taxable costs per statute/rule
- Expert witness fees (if recoverable)
- Pre/post-judgment interest (specify rate and calculation date)
- Fees-on-fees (supplemental application reserved)
- Such other relief as the court deems just
Pitfalls & Checks
- Cite precisely — Bluebook format; verify citations are current and not overruled
- Quote the record — every factual assertion must cite a specific document or order
- No inflation — time entries must be truthful; never exaggerate hours
- Candor to tribunal — disclose adverse authority; represent holdings accurately
- Protect privilege — redact work product; generalize strategy-revealing descriptions
- Anticipate opposition — preempt rate, hours, staffing, block-billing, and limited-success objections
- Deadline compliance — commonly 14 days from judgment under FRCP 54(d)(2); check local rules
- Jurisdiction-specific — verify catalyst theory recognition; check state lodestar variations
- Mark uncertain citations with [VERIFY]