When the government takes private property, the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (and a corollary provision of the Minnesota Constitution) requires the payment of “just compensation” to the property owner.
In Minnesota, the legislature enacted a statute (Minn. Stat. § 117.031(a)) directing awards of “reasonable attorney fees” to landowners forced to litigate when the state takes land, and fails to offer just compensation.
In one such case — brought by property owner Joseph Hamlin — the district court ordered the state to pay reasonable attorney fees that had been calculated under the “Lodestar” method (reasonable hours multiplied by a reasonable rate). The resulting fee award was higher than the amount that had been contemplated in a contract executed between Hamlin and his attorney.
The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office (representing the State’s Department of Transportation) challenged the fee award, contending that it was too high. In its arguments, the State also challenged the use of the lodestar method to calculate “reasonable attorneys fees” — a method frequently used to calculate attorney fees in civil rights and public interest litigation with the government.
PRM filed an amicus brief in support of Hamlin at the Minnesota Supreme Court, arguing that Minn. Stat. § 117.031(a) entitled Hamlin to a fee award calculated under the lodestar method.
PRM’s interest in the case stemmed from its focus on public interest litigation aimed at upholding constitutional rights. Both state and federal legislative bodies have added “fee shifting” provisions to certain statutes, aimed at attracting competent counsel to take on cases brought under those statutes. These include laws that have created causes of action around everything from civil rights violations, to “taking” claims (as was the case in Hamlin).
In Minnesota, “reasonable attorney fees” are calculated under the Lodestar method in a wide variety of situations. Knowing this, the district court in Hamlin used the Lodestar method to arrive at the attorney fee award due to Joseph Hamlin.
The State of Minnesota, however, had other ideas, and appealed the fee award, claiming that the Lodestar method should not be used if a plaintiff and an attorney had previously agreed on a set fee amount.
As FCR noted in its brief, the state’s position would completely eliminate fee awards for so-called “low bono” attorneys who take on meritorious civil rights cases for reduced fees; expecting that they will receive compensation via statutory fee awards when they prevail. These kinds of arrangements are crucial to providing legal services to many parties who have been disadvantaged by the government — and not only in the eminent domain arena.
Ultimately, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled for Joseph Hamlin, holding that “‘reasonable attorney fees’ under section 117.031(a) means attorney fees calculated using the lodestar method.”
