In Re Oliver L. North (Watson Fee Application)
Docket: Division 86-6
Court: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit; September 13, 1994; Federal Appellate Court
Colonel Samuel J. Watson applied for reimbursement of $18,100 in attorneys' fees incurred during the Iran/Contra investigation led by Independent Counsel Lawrence E. Walsh. Under section 593(f) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, reimbursement is available for subjects of investigations where no indictment is issued, provided the fees are reasonable and incurred due to the investigation's requirements. The court found that Watson's attorney failed to submit contemporaneous time records to substantiate the fee request, leading to the denial of Watson's petition in its entirety. Watson was identified as a "subject" of the investigation in September 1990 and made multiple appearances before a federal grand jury, but no indictment was brought against him. His attorney employed a non-standard billing method, allowing Watson to track their time together rather than maintaining formal records. The court ultimately did not need to assess the reasonableness of the fees due to the lack of supporting documentation. Assessing the reasonableness of attorneys' fees necessitates evaluating the time attorneys have expended on a case. To facilitate this evaluation, attorneys must maintain accurate contemporaneous records of their work. In Watson's case, his attorney failed to produce or maintain such records, instead relying on Watson's estimates based on his appointment calendar, which lacked detail. This reliance on vague after-the-fact estimates is inadequate to support a fee award, leading to the conclusion that the reasonableness of attorney time cannot be assessed. Consequently, the petition for fees must be denied. Furthermore, Watson's arrangement with his attorney indicates that he is not currently obligated to pay for legal services, as it was understood that payment would occur only when his personal circumstances allowed. This arrangement does not meet the statutory requirement for fees to be "incurred." Therefore, Watson is unable to recover attorney fees under the relevant Act, leading to the denial of his petition. Judgment is rendered accordingly.