It really feels like double dipping to charge all that AND keep the retainer fee, doesn’t it? Is it standard practice to keep a 5 figure retainer from a middle-class individual and not put it towards the hours worked?

Should he really get paid by the losing party even on the time spent on claims that lost at trial, and on fees for witnesses that were never called?

Should he really get a “multiplier” because he might not have won and his client would obviously have been unable to pay him millions?

What exactly are the “tax consequences” of a verdict, and why should the defendant pay them? If she earned that money as normal income (if she had never been discriminated against) she would have payed taxes on it anyway. Isn’t it up to the government to charge less tax in this situation if they feel that making her pay is somehow unjust?