A U.S. District Court has issued a ruling regarding the allocation of attorney fees in the long-running case of True the Vote, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service, Civil Action No. 13-734 (RBW). The court's decision affects the legal teams representing True the Vote, particularly the Bopp Law Firm and the former attorneys from the Public Interest Legal Foundation and Foley & Lardner LLP.

The case revolves around a dispute over attorney fees following a successful claim under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). The court's ruling clarifies how much each legal team is entitled to from the awarded fees, which total $788,539.30. This decision is significant as it sets a precedent for how attorney fees are divided among multiple legal representatives in similar cases.

Background

True the Vote, Inc. (TTV) is a non-profit organization focused on election integrity. It filed a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in 2013, claiming violations of its First Amendment rights and seeking various forms of relief, including monetary damages. The case has seen multiple legal battles over the years, including disputes about attorney fees.

Initially, TTV was represented by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) and Foley & Lardner LLP. However, in 2017, TTV switched legal representation to the Bopp Law Firm (BLF). The ongoing dispute centers on the fees owed to these attorneys after the court awarded a substantial sum under the EAJA.

The Ruling

On November 9, 2026, Judge Reggie B. Walton ruled that the BLF has a valid equitable charging lien under Indiana law. However, the court denied the BLF's request to enforce its lien for $505,003.38 against the total EAJA award. Instead, the court determined that the BLF is entitled to only $150,018.98, which corresponds to the services it provided directly to TTV.

The court ruled, "the BLF can only enforce its equitable charging lien to the amount of $150,018.98."
Judge Walton stated that the BLF's lien applies only to the portion of the EAJA award attributable to its work, not the entire amount awarded.

This ruling followed a remand from the D.C. Circuit Court, which had previously found that the lower court erred in requiring the BLF to meet both prongs of the Indiana law test for equitable charging liens. The appellate court clarified that the BLF needed to demonstrate only one of the two prongs to establish its lien.

Impact

The court's decision has significant implications for the allocation of attorney fees in cases involving multiple legal representatives. By limiting the BLF's recovery to the amount corresponding to its own work, the ruling reinforces the principle that attorneys should be compensated based on their contributions to a case.

This ruling may influence how future cases involving multiple attorneys are handled, particularly in terms of fee agreements and the establishment of equitable charging liens. It underscores the importance of clear agreements between clients and attorneys regarding fee arrangements.

What's Next

While the BLF can appeal the court's ruling, the immediate focus will likely be on the distribution of the awarded fees. The court's decision sets a clear framework for how attorney fees should be allocated in similar cases moving forward.