Legislature(1999 - 2000)
02/22/2000 09:02 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 123
"An Act relating to public interest litigants and to
attorney fees; and amending Rule 82, Alaska Rules of
Civil Procedure."
Co-Chair Torgerson noted that Version 1-LS0636\I had been
previously adopted and was held over in order to
incorporate Amendment number two.
Amendment # 2: This amendment would add a new paragraph to
the Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure to read:
(5) If the court chooses to vary an award of
attorney's fees under (b)(3) of this rule by
increasing the award beyond the amounts provided in
(b)(1) or (2) of this rule, then the court shall
apportion the attorney's fees by issue and may only
award the increased fees for an issue the party
prevailed upon unless the court finds exceptional
circumstances to be present that require an increased
award of fees without apportionment by issue.
Senator Donley made a motion to MOVE Amendment # 2. Co-
Chair Torgerson noted an objection by Co-Chair Parnell.
Senator Donley said that this amendment was an effort to
compromise and to capture the best of the proposals before
the Committee, which were discussed previously. He noted
that this amendment would preserve Co-Chair Parnell's
proposal regarding public interest litigants being treated
the same as civil litigants under Rule 82, but it would go
one step further. He added that if the court made a
decision to award an amount of attorney's fees in excess of
what is allowed under Rule 82, then this amendment would
instruct the court to apportion attorney's fees by issue.
He continued that this amendment would still allow the
court not to apportion by issue if exceptional
circumstances are found, not requiring a mandate for such a
determination.
Senator Adams noted that he was trying to understand the
intent of this amendment. He used the Veneti case in the
context of this amendment and he asked whether the type of
payment would also need to be agreed upon before arguing
the merits of a particular case.
Senator Donley responded that the Veneti case was a federal
one, without the jurisdiction of Rule 82. He continued
that if this case had come under state jurisdiction, the
amendment would be consistent with what the court decided
in this instance. He added that the court tried to
apportion as best it could for the proportional costs of
the case.
Co-Chair Parnell stated that Senator Donley met his
objection by providing for public interest litigants
enhanced attorney's fees. He also noted how this amendment
made the playing field level for both public interest
litigants and civil litigants.
Senator Adams asked if reference to both public interest
litigants and civil litigants should be provided for in the
bill title.
Co-Chair Parnell responded that he did not think so, since
the title of the act was broad enough to include both types
of litigants.
Senator Adams noted that he had no objection to this
amendment.
Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection to Amendment # 2,
ADOPTED the same.
Senator Donley made a motion to move SB 123; Version 1-
LS0636\I as amended from Committee with individual
recommendations and attached zero fiscal note from the
Alaska Court System. Hearing no objection SB 123 was MOVED
FROM COMMITTEE.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|