Opinion ID: 452077
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: background facts and the fee petition ruling

Text: 5 The relevant facts surrounding the complex litigation underlying this attorneys fee request have very recently been summarized by this Court and need not be repeated here. See DVCCCA v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 755 F.2d 38, 40-41 (3d Cir.1985). 2 We will therefore turn directly to a brief description of the fee petition litigation itself. 6 In its petition to the district court for attorneys fees and costs, plaintiff divided its request for compensation into nine phases. 3 The Commonwealth acceded to this approach, as did the district court, which made its fee award in terms of the nine phases. 4 The district court considered an extensive record and decided the fee petition application in a comprehensive opinion of some 40 pages. While we need not summarize the district court's opinion (the challenged portions are discussed infra ), it is important to note that the court took much care in examining the fee petition and disallowed a significant number of claimed hours because it found them inadequately documented, duplicative, unnecessary, or excessive. The court awarded attorneys fees of $209,813.00 for work in the underlying litigation representing a lodestar of $82,233.50 augmented by multipliers of two for phases IV and VII and four for Phase V. 5 The court then stayed its order pending appeal.