In the Matter of the Attorney's Fees and Costs In the Termination of Parental Rights To: NRF and JWF, Minor Children, Donald Lee Tolin, Attorney for LMB, Natural Mother v. State of Wyoming, Department of Family Services, 294 P.3d 879

Tolin was court-appointed to represent an indigent parent in a DFS termination action, with DFS obligated to pay his attorney fees under Wyoming law.
The case proceeded to trial in 2010, resulting in termination of parental rights; Tolin later withdrew the appeal.
Tolin sought $48,717.00 in fees for 487.17 hours at $100/hour plus $334.30 in expenses; DFS paid $24,358.50 plus $334.30 expenses after a 50% reduction.
Judge Wilking reviewed the fee request after Judge Skavdahl left office and reduced hours by 50%, citing numerous concerns about reasonableness of hours billed.
The district court found issues such as excessive hours, clerical tasks billed at attorney rates, and insufficient billing judgment, supporting a substantial reduction.
On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the 50% reduction, endorsing the lodestar approach and discretion to trim unproductive, excessive, or redundant hours.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 50% hours reduction was an abuse of discretion	Tolin argues the court should accept his hours as billed	DFS argues the district court properly pruned excessive time and limited billing judgment failures	No abuse; district court properly reduced hours for reasonableness
Whether the lodestar method was correctly applied	Tolin contends the full lodestar should be awarded	DFS supports application of lodestar with downward adjustments for inefficiency	Lodestar applied with downward adjustment appropriate
Whether clerical tasks were inappropriately billed at attorney rates	Tolin argues clerical entries are legitimate because they relate to his case	District court properly reduced clerical entries and maintained separate clerical-rate billing	Clerical tasks should not be billed at attorney rates; reductions upheld
Whether excessive hours for discovery review and trial days were reasonably reduced	Tolin asserts long hours were necessary and reasonable	Court found hours for discovery review and trial days excessive and trimmed them	Yes; reductions of numerous trial and preparation hours affirmed
Whether billing judgment was exercised in the fee application	Tolin claims he exercised billing judgment and documented hours	Court rejected unproductive or speculative hours and emphasized need for billing judgment	Court properly exercised billing judgment and trimmed unproductive hours

UNC Teton Exploration Drilling, Inc. v. Peyton, 774 P.2d 584 (Wyo. 1989) (lodestar factors and reasonableness inquiry for attorney fees)
Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (U.S. 1983) (general approach to fee-shifting and reducing excessive hours)
Fox v. Vice, 131 S. Ct. 2205 (U.S. 2011) (appellate courts may independently review fee records; avoid micromanagement)
Ramos v. Lamm, 713 F.2d 546 (10th Cir. 1983) (courts scrutinize reconstructed time records for reasonableness)
Green v. Adm’rs of Tulane Educ. Fund, 284 F.3d 642 (5th Cir. 2002) (billing judgment and exclusion of nonproductive time)
Copeland v. Marshall, 641 F.2d 880 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (reasonableness and proportionality in hours and billing judgments)
Mares v. Credit Bureau of Raton, 801 F.2d 1197 (10th Cir. 1986) (upholding reductions to eliminate excessive hours)