Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued March 19, 2008
Decided June 2, 2008
Full case name Richlin Security Service Company, petitioner
v
Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security
Docket nos. 06-717
Citations 553 U.S. 571 (more)
128 S. Ct. 2007; 170 L. Ed. 2d 960; 2008 U.S. LEXIS 4522; 76 U.S.L.W. 4360; 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 279
Argument Oral argument
Holding
A prevailing party that satisfies EAJA’s other requirements mayrecover its paralegal fees from the Government at prevailing market rates. 472 F. 3d 1370, reversed and remanded.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority Alito, joined by Roberts, Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer; Scalia (except part III-A); Thomas (except parts II-B, III)
Laws applied
Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) (5 U.S.C. § 504; 28 U.S.C. § 2412

Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff, 553 U.S. 571 (2008), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States evaluated standards for awarding attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.[1] After it prevailed in a lawsuit for back wages, Richlin filed an application for reimbursement of fees and expenses from the lawsuit, including 523.8 hours of paralegal work.[2] Richlin requested the paralegal fees at the market rate for the services, rather than at the cost to the law firm that represented Richlin.[3] The Department of Transportation’s Board of Contract Appeals ruled that recovery of fees should be limited to the cost to the attorneys, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board's determination.[4] In an opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito, the Court held that parties are entitled to remibursement for services at prevailing market rates.[5]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff, 553 U.S. 571, 573 (2008).
  2. ^ Richlin Security Service Co., 553 U.S. at 574 (citing 5 U. S. C. § 504(a)(1) (the application was filed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 504(a)(1)).
  3. ^ Richlin Security Service Co., 553 U.S. at 574-75.
  4. ^ Richlin Security Service Co., 553 U.S. at 574-75.
  5. ^ Richlin Security Service Co., 553 U.S. at 583-84.