Keyes v. Denver School District No. 1 Affidavit of Robert T. Connery

     [||bd6b4675-b738-432b-91bf-a5f5902360bc||] IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Civil Action No. C-1499 

WILFRED KEYES, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

Ve. 

‘ 

SCHOOY, DISTRICT NO. 1, 

Denver, Colorado, et al., 

Defendants, 

CONGRESS OF HISPANIC EDUCA- 
TORS, et al., 

AFFIDAVIT 
OF 

ROBERT T. CONNERY 

MONTBELLO CITIZENS' 
COMMITTEE, INC., 

MOORE SCHOOL COMMUNITY 

ASSOCIATION AND MOORE SCHOOL 
LAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE, 

UNITED PARENTS OF NORTHEAST 

DNEVER, a non-profit corpo- 
ration, et 'al., 

CITIZENS ASSOCIATION FOR 
NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS, an 
unincorporated association, 

CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR 
-QUALITY EDUCATION, 

N
o
 

Na
st
? 
N
u
?
 
N
w
 
N
w
 
S
s
 
N
t
 
i
 
N
u
 

s
t
l
 
“
w
a
t
 
i
 

i
t
l
 
a
d
h
 
i
”
 

a
t
?
 
a
a
 
S
i
l
 
a
t
l
 
N
w
?
 
u
s
t
 
a
 

a
t
l
 
i
 

t
l
 

a
i
l
 
S
a
i
l
 
g
l
 
“
u
i
 
“
u
i
?
 
“
u
t
?
 
“
u
P
 
S
a
u
?
 

Intervenors. 

STATE OF COLORADO 

SS. 

N
a
s
”
 

me
t’
 
“
u
n
?
 

CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER 

Robert T. Connery, the Affiant, of lawful age, being 

duly sworn, deposes and says: 

il. Affiant has been an attorney of record in this 

case since June 19, 1969. 

Affiant is a partner in the law firm of Holland 

& Hart. During the course of this litigation nine partners 

of Holland & Hart have rendered legal services for plaintiffs 



and the class. The two partners of Holland & Hart who have 

principally worked on the case are Gordon G. Greiner and 

Robert T. Connery. Six associates, one summer clerk, and 

two paralegal assistants have also devoted minor amounts of 

time (less. than 50 hours each) to the case. Mr. Greiner's 

time on the case, 5,195.7 hours, has constituted more than 

83% of the total time devoted to the case by attorneys of 

Holland '& Hart. - Mr. Connery's time has represented more 

than 9% of the total time devoted by Holland & Hart to the 

case. Together Mr. Greiner and Mr. Connery's time have con- 

stituted more than 92% of the time devoted by Holland & Hart 

to the case. The current hourly rate normally considered in 

connection with charges for legal services for Mr. Greiner's 

time in connection with non-contingent matters is $60 per 

hour, and that of Mr. Connery 1s $50 per hour. Paralegal 

assistants, whose normal hourly charge is $20 per hour, 

devoted 41 hours to the case. Other ASeoelates und partners 

of the firm who have devoted 429.3 hours to the case have 

hourly rates ranging from $28 per hour to $55 per hour. The 

exact time devoted by each partner, associate, summer clerk, 

and paralegal assistant is listed in Exhibit B and summarized 

there on page 1 of Exhibit B. 

3. Affiant further informs the court that, although 

the foregoing hourly rates are considered by Holland & Hart 

lawyers as one factor in billing for non-contingent liti- 

gation legal services, they are not the sole factor. The 

basic billing principles which serve as a guide to Holland & 

Hart attorneys in determining fees for non-contingent liti- 

gation and other legal service as well as time, are the 

following: 



(a) the amount involved; 

(b) the results accomplished; 
(c) the customary or competitive charges of the 

bar for similar services; 
(Gd) the ability of the client to pay; 
(e) the effort expended; 

(f) whether the work was done by an attorney 
who is a specialist in that particular 
area; 

(g) the difficulty of the question or questions 
involved; 

(h) whether the taking of the particular work 
involved a chance of losing other employemnt; 

(i) whether the fee is certain or is contingent 
on the result obtained; 

(J) the speed with which the services were 
rendered; 

(k) whether it was necessary to perform the 
work on a rush basis, thereby pre-empting 
time of the attorney which he would other- 
wise have placed on outstanding matters 
for other clients; and 

(1) whether there is likely to be additional 
business coming to the firm from that par- 
ticular client. : 

Primary consideration is given to EC 2-18, which is part of 

Canon 2 in the Code of Professional Responsibility, and in 

pertinent part provides as follows: 

BC 2-18 

The determination of the reasonableness 
.0f a fee requires consideration of all rele- 
vant circumstances, including those stated 
in the Disciplinary Rules. The fees of a 
lawyer will vary according to many factors, 
including the time required, his experience, 
ability, and the reputation, the nature of 
the employment, the responsibility involved, 
and the results obtained. Suggested fee 
schedules and economic reports of state and 
local bar associations provide some guidance 
on the subject of reascnable fees. 

4. The firm of Holland & Hart customarily is compen- 

sated on a current basis determined on the basis of the 

faotons set forth above. As the Court is aware, where 

lawyers render services on a purely contingent basis, not 

only is the uncertainty of any fee involved, but the attorneys 

‘bear their overhead throughout the duracion of the law suit. 



® @ 

In this case Holland & Hart's overhead has been very sub- 

stantial and has not been paid. 

5 The hourly rates for legal services specified 

above are clearly only one factor even in non-contingent 

engagements of the firm, and do not reflect adjustments 

ordinarily made for the factor of success in litigation or 

the unusual demands made by trial work. 

LL NER #7 Ye Sy erate idan, . 

Robert T. Connery 4 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7 hain day of 

Cori toca ts + 1975. 
v 
Witness my hand and official seal. 

My commission expires 2? 2) aunt 7277 . 
‘ 

| Notx¥y Public 
[SEAL] [||bd6b4675-b738-432b-91bf-a5f5902360bc||]