[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that is insane ... it isn't as if they are responding to a run of the mill auto case or tort action. This is a novel claim that involves some of the trickier areas of law.

Someone has to tear apart the Complaint, paragraph by paragraph, count by count. Then you have to meet with the client to dicsuss what all is meant by the allegations that are made. Assuming they aren't general counsel for WPTE, they have to understand the corporate structure of the WPTE and exam all the contracts with all the casinos, and all the contracts with the Discovery channel, and all other contracts that they have that might impact the release issue. In this case, they did research on Full Tilt and the princiapls of that company, and then I am sure did a ton of investigation of the 7 plaintiffs. Facts have to be tracked down and checked. Hell, someone probably had to sit down and research the poker industry and determine the extent to which there are big-buy tournaments, etc.

Then all the issues of law have to be researched and discussed. You have the anti-trust allegations, you have contract issues with the release, and I am not sure what area of law the speed of the blinds falls under [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]. I am sure there were issues of venue, etc. Then the associates have to write memoranda of law on all these issues that are reviewed by partners, and then they all sit down to kick around the law and what the possible defenses would be.

Finally, they get around to writing the Answer that has to be painstakingly checked and rechecked. I can easily see this entire process taking a couple hundred hours. Remember this is considered very complex litigation, with novel facts, and some complicated legal theories, with millions of dollars riding on it, the Plaintiff's claims that they aren't in it for the money notwithstanding.

I dealt with some complex litigation dealing with asbestos property damage, as well as school desegregation. We spent those types of hours on research, meeting, drafting, etc.

I think it would easily take 3 or 4 people a week or two to complete the response to this lawsuit, and at 60 hours per week billable, that is going to get you to 200 pretty quickly.

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree that all of that has to be done. But it doesn't really have to be done for the sake of preparing the answer.

Take this, for example:
[ QUOTE ]
Hell, someone probably had to sit down and research the poker industry and determine the extent to which there are big-buy tournaments, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is going to be important to the actual case. But for purposes of filing the answer, the defendent just has to allege that it has no market power because there are zillions of competitive big buy-in events out there. It doesn't matter whether it's true.

The defendant may have spent $50K in attorneys fees already, in total. But I don't think it's fair to earmark it all for the preperation of the answer. Answers, by their nature, are usually pretty generic. I know that antitrust allegations aren't the same as simple tort allegations, but the same kitchen sink rule would apply: Figure out what all the possible defenses to each cause of action are, and plead each of them. It's largely a legal exercise that doesn't require a ton of factual investigation.