Opinion ID: 184437
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Determining the Market Rate

Text: As we explained in Covington, a party who avers that therate charged by her attorneys incorporated a public-spiriteddiscount must offer evidence as to the correct market rate forthe attorneys' services. The party must both offer evidenceto demonstrate [her] attorneys' experience, skill, reputation,and the complexity of the case and produce data concerningthe prevailing market rates in the relevant community forattorneys of reasonably comparable skill, experience, andreputation. 57 F.3d at 1108. In setting the market rate, thedistrict court should consider what rate would be commensurate with the attorneys' skill and experience, and with thequality of the attorneys' work. To cite one of the dissent'sexamples, if a firm uses a case as a training-ground for youngattorneys, the district court might find that the discountedrate charged by the firm reflected the attorneys' inexperience, and is the actual market value of the attorneys' services. Because the district court is most familiar with the quality ofthe attorneys' work, we will defer to its reasonable assessment of that work's market value. Both the Trustees and JPR submitted evidence on prevailing market rates and on the skill and experience of theFunds' attorneys. Because the district court did not reachthe question of the appropriate market rate, we will notdiscuss these two factors further; Covington contains a detailed discussion of these questions. See Covington, 57 F.3dat 1108-10. We leave the issue of the prevailing market rateto the initial discretion of the district court.