Drafts post-judgment motions for attorneys' fees using the lodestar method. Covers prevailing party analysis, rate justification, hours documentation, billing judgment, lodestar enhancements, and supporting declarations. Trigger when user needs a fee motion, fee petition, lodestar calculation, or post-trial fee application.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add CaseMark/skills --skill attorneys-fees-motion --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Attorneys Fees Motion?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/casemark-attorneys-fees-motion)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: attorneys-fees-motion
language: en
description: Drafts post-judgment motions for attorneys' fees using the lodestar method. Covers prevailing party analysis, rate justification, hours documentation, billing judgment, lodestar enhancements, and supporting declarations. Trigger when user needs a fee motion, fee petition, lodestar calculation, or post-trial fee application.
tags:
- drafting
- litigation
- motion
---
# Motion for Attorneys' Fees
Draft a post-judgment fee motion establishing prevailing party status, applying the lodestar method, and presenting a documented fee petition.
## Prerequisites
- Final judgment or order establishing prevailing party status
- Fee-shifting authority — statute (e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 1988), contract, or common law basis
- Contemporaneous time records for all timekeepers
- Timekeeper qualifications (CVs, specializations, recognitions)
- Rate evidence — recent fee awards, bar surveys, market data
- Case docket and procedural history
- Local rules on formatting, page limits, and filing deadlines
## Quick Start
1. Confirm fee-shifting basis and prevailing party status from judgment
2. Collect time records, rate evidence, and timekeeper credentials
3. Calculate lodestar: reasonable hours × reasonable rate
4. Document billing judgment (excluded time) to build credibility
5. Draft motion following the section structure below
6. Prepare supporting declaration and exhibit index
## Motion Structure
### I. Caption & Compliance
- Full court name, division, case number, party designations
- Title: "Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees [and Costs]"
- TOC/TOA if required; verify local formatting rules
### II. Introduction
| Element | Content |
|---------|---------|
| Moving party | Name + prevailing party identification |
| Fee authority | Statutory citation or contract clause (verbatim) |
| Judgment reference | Date, holdings, relief granted |
| Total fees sought | Dollar amount with breakdown |
| Roadmap | Authority → rates → hours → results |
### III. Litigation Narrative
Chronological narrative emphasizing fee-reasonableness factors:
- Nature of dispute — claims, defenses, stakes
- Procedural milestones with dates — motions (with outcomes), discovery, depositions, trial
- Complexity indicators — novel issues, document volume, expert witnesses, party count
- Opposing conduct increasing work — cite specific orders/correspondence
- Quality of representation — favorable outcomes, results achieved
### IV. Legal Standard
Present in this order:
1. **Fee-shifting authority** — quote statutory/contractual language verbatim
2. **Prevailing party test** — jurisdiction-specific; address *Buckhannon* for settlement-based recovery
3. **Lodestar method** — *Hensley v. Eckerhart*, 461 U.S. 424 (1983)
4. **Johnson factors** — if adopted; *Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express*, 488 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974) [VERIFY]
5. **Lodestar enhancements** — *Perdue v. Kenny A.*, 559 U.S. 542 (2010)
6. **Fee allocation** — *Hensley* common-core-of-facts doctrine for partial success
7. **Fees-on-fees** — authority for time spent on the fee motion itself
### V. Prevailing Party Analysis
- Quote judgment establishing favorable outcome
- Apply jurisdiction's test to specific findings
- Address degree of success relative to fees sought
- If settlement: address catalyst theory / consent decree applicability
- Preempt limited-success arguments
### VI. Lodestar Calculation
**A. Rate Justification** — for each timekeeper:
| Timekeeper | Role | Years | Rate | Market Evidence |
|------------|------|-------|------|-----------------|
| [Name] | Partner | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] |
| [Name] | Associate | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] |
| [Name] | Paralegal | [X] | $[X]/hr | [Awards, surveys] |
Support with: comparable fee awards, bar survey data, attorney qualifications.
**B. Hours by Phase**
| Phase | Hours | Justification |
|-------|-------|---------------|
| Case assessment & pleadings | | Complexity, investigation scope |
| Written discovery | | Volume, disputes |
| Document review | | Document count, privilege review |
| Depositions | | Witness count, preparation |
| Motion practice | | Per-motion breakdown with outcomes |
| Expert work | | Retention, reports |
| Settlement/mediation | | Sessions, preparation |
| Trial preparation | | Witnesses, exhibits |
| Trial/hearing | | Days in court |
| Post-judgment | | Fee motion, enforcement |
| **Total** | | |
**C. Billing Judgment** — document excluded time:
- Clerical tasks at professional rates
- Duplicative research or learning curve
- Error correction
- Quantify hours excluded per category
**D. Staffing Appropriateness** — routine tasks to associates/paralegals; justify senior time on routine work.
**E. Enhancement** (if sought) — multiplier, basis (exceptional results, contingent risk, complexity), jurisdiction-specific authority, inadequacy of base lodestar.
### VII. Supporting Declaration
Numbered-paragraph declaration under penalty of perjury:
- ¶¶ 1–3: Declarant qualifications, role, personal knowledge
- ¶¶ 4–6: Time record authentication — contemporaneous, accurate
- ¶¶ 7–9: Billing judgment — categories excluded, amounts
- ¶¶ 10–12: Rate reasonableness — customary rates, market consistency
- ¶¶ 13–15: Hours reasonableness — necessity, complexity, staffing
- ¶¶ 16+: Additional timekeepers (qualifications, rates)
- Execution block: venue, date, signature, notarization if required
Consider supplemental declarations: peer rate affidavits, client value declaration.
### VIII. Exhibits
| Exhibit | Contents |
|---------|----------|
| A | Detailed time records (date, timekeeper, hours, description) |
| B | Judgment/order establishing prevailing party status |
| C | Fee-shifting statute or contract provision |
| D | Timekeeper resumes/CVs |
| E | Market rate evidence (fee awards, surveys) |
| F | Comparable fee award orders |
| G | Key orders showing complexity/opposing conduct |
Redact work product from time entries; explain redactions in declaration.
### IX. Prayer for Relief
- Attorneys' fees: $[amount] (lodestar) [+ enhancement = $[total]]
- Taxable costs per statute/rule
- Expert witness fees (if recoverable)
- Pre/post-judgment interest (specify rate and calculation date)
- Fees-on-fees (supplemental application reserved)
- Such other relief as the court deems just
## Pitfalls & Checks
- **Cite precisely** — Bluebook format; verify citations are current and not overruled
- **Quote the record** — every factual assertion must cite a specific document or order
- **No inflation** — time entries must be truthful; never exaggerate hours
- **Candor to tribunal** — disclose adverse authority; represent holdings accurately
- **Protect privilege** — redact work product; generalize strategy-revealing descriptions
- **Anticipate opposition** — preempt rate, hours, staffing, block-billing, and limited-success objections
- **Deadline compliance** — commonly 14 days from judgment under FRCP 54(d)(2); check local rules
- **Jurisdiction-specific** — verify catalyst theory recognition; check state lodestar variations
- **Mark uncertain citations** with [VERIFY]
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!