Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
United States v. William Michael Adkinson
Citations: 360 F.3d 1257; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 2568; 2004 WL 292044Docket: 03-11104
Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit; February 17, 2004; Federal Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
William Michael Adkinson appeals a district court order awarding him $100,169.75 in attorney’s fees and costs under the Hyde Amendment. He presents three arguments: 1. **Limitation on Fees**: Adkinson claims the district court erred by applying limitations on attorney’s fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). This argument is rejected based on precedent from *United States v. Aisenberg*, which confirms that Hyde Amendment fee awards are indeed subject to these limitations. 2. **Market Rate Payment**: Adkinson argues that the district court abused its discretion by determining no special factors warranted payment of fees at the prevailing market rate instead of the rate specified in § 2412(d)(2)(A). The court found no abuse of discretion, appropriately rejecting Adkinson's claims of special factors in its detailed opinion. 3. **Calculation of Hours**: He contests the district court's calculation of the reasonable number of hours worked by his attorneys. The court is found to have acted within its discretion, having carefully calculated the hours and applied the correct legal standards. The court affirms the district court's order, concluding that each of Adkinson’s arguments lacks merit.