JUNEAU, Alaska — Failed U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller is being asked to pay a portion of the legal fees the state and Sen. Lisa Murkowski incurred in fighting his challenge to last fall’s election.
Miller’s attorneys are fighting the request, claiming among other things that
Miller only filed a case in state court because he was directed to by a federal judge. They argue that the court should not award the state or Murkowski fees but if it does, it should be “substantially reduced” amounts.
Miller sued over the state’s handling of the election and counting of votes for Murkowski, who ran as a write-in candidate after losing the GOP primary to Miller. Miller initially filed in federal court but the judge determined the issue was best decided, at least initially, with the state courts. So Miller filed in Superior Court.
Subsequently, three courts — Superior Court, the state Supreme Court and the federal court — refused to overturn results favoring Murkowski. She was certified the winner in late December.
Attorneys’ fees are not recoverable in federal court; in state court, when no money is at issue in the litigation, the winning parties can seek up to 20 percent of their attorney fees.
The state is seeking about $16,500 in attorneys’ fees from Miller. It also is asking for $813.30 in other costs, according to court papers. Murkowski’s attorneys are asking for $11,800 in fees and another $3,100 for costs such as travel and copying.
The state also has requested $400 from Murkowski since she lost her effort to have certain ballots counted toward her tally.
In court filings, Miller’s attorneys lay out a number of reasons for opposing the requests. Among those: that granting attorneys’ fees to either party would have a chilling effect on others seeking to challenge the handling of elections, and that Miller should not have to pay for fees associated with most of his claims because they revolved around protecting his constitutional rights and those of the more than 90,000 Alaskans who voted for him.
The attorneys also say that some of the fees requested are unreasonable, calling 384.4 hours of attorney time from the state excessive.
“To put it simply, the state is seeking to be reimbursed for having spent the equivalent of nearly 10 40-hour ‘work weeks’ worth of attorney time on this case,” attorneys John Tiemessen and Michael Morley said, adding that the state’s filings don’t reflect 2½ months of legal work.
They also claim Murkowski is ineligible to have costs paid because she lost her claim against the state and didn’t need to be a party to the case — that the state, with lawyers, was “adequately representing her interests.”
The state is due to expected to file a response in court by Friday.
Murkowski’s attorneys, in court papers, maintain that Murkowski is entitled to costs because Miller was trying to void or reduce the margin of her win. They also say the amount requested isn’t onerous and dispute Miller’s claims that an award of fees would dissuade future lawsuits from “similarly situated litigants.”
Miller’s campaign reported that he had about $825,000 on hand at the end of 2010.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
