Host Jonathan Porter welcomes Husch Blackwell partner Kate Ledden to the podcast to discuss the often-contentious issue of relators’ attorneys’ fees in False Claims Act cases. With fee awards sometimes reaching millions of dollars, this topic has significant financial implications for defendants and raises important questions about what constitutes “reasonable” compensation for qui tam counsel.
We begin by exploring the statutory framework for fee-shifting under the False Claims Act. Kate explains when See more +
Host Jonathan Porter welcomes Husch Blackwell partner Kate Ledden to the podcast to discuss the often-contentious issue of relators’ attorneys’ fees in False Claims Act cases. With fee awards sometimes reaching millions of dollars, this topic has significant financial implications for defendants and raises important questions about what constitutes “reasonable” compensation for qui tam counsel.
We begin by exploring the statutory framework for fee-shifting under the False Claims Act. Kate explains when relators are entitled to attorneys’ fees, what it means to “successfully litigate” a case, and why Congress departed from the American Rule to incentivize whistleblowers to bring qui tam actions. She also clarifies that fee awards come on top of the relator’s share of the government’s recovery.
Next, we examine how courts determine what constitutes “reasonable” attorneys’ fees using the lodestar method. Kate walks listeners through the two core inputs—reasonable hours and reasonable hourly rates—and explains why courts favor this objective, reviewable approach that approximates what a paying client would pay in comparable hourly-billed litigation. We discuss the unique challenge in False Claims Act cases where complexity can drive the lodestar calculation to enormous levels.
Our conversation then turns to the controversial practice of multipliers and enhancements to the lodestar calculation. Kate explains when courts might adjust the lodestar product up or down, why such adjustments are rare, and why courts resist multiplying lodestar based on complexity or risk arguments that relators’ attorneys commonly advance.
We examine the recent Ninth Circuit decision in United States ex rel. Thrower v. Academy Mortgage Corp., where a district court awarded $8.5 million in attorneys’ fees (including a 1.75x multiplier) on a $38.5 million settlement. Kate discusses why the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding the district court abused its discretion by enhancing lodestar for an “exceptional result” that was already captured in the reasonable hours and rates calculation.
We close with practical guidance for litigating attorneys’ fees issues going forward. Kate outlines concrete strategies for the defense, including how to scrutinize time records, challenge hourly rates, and push back against improper multipliers in light of Thrower’s guidance. See less -
