A recent NLJ story, “Fight Over Bratz Doll Turns to Attorney Fees, Punitive Damages” reports that Bratz doll manufacturer MGA Entertainment Inc. is seeking attorney fees plus $177 million in punitive damages after obtaining an $88.5 million verdict against rival Mattel Inc.  MGA attorney Annette Hurst, a partner at San Francisco’s Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe moved for attorney fees on behalf of the primary firms that handle the litigation for her side: O’Melveny & Myers; Skadden Arps; Orrick; and Keller Rackauckas.

A federal jury in Santa Ana, Calif., rejected Mattel’s claims that MGA infringed on its copyright after hiring away a designer who took the idea for the Bratz doll with him.  The jury found Mattel, maker of Barbie, did not own the rights to the first four models of the Bratz doll.  Instead, jurors found that Mattel had stolen MGA’s trade secrets by having its employees spy at industry trade shows.

The amount of attorney fees MGA is seeking has been redacted in publicly available court documents.  In her fees motion, Hurst wrote that MGA’s demand was “conservative” compared to what the company actually spent.  The amount did not include fees for several firms whose “roles were less centrally related.”  “Mattel is a prolific litigant,” Hurst wrote.  “Mattel waged war against MGA in this litigation, using every means available to multiply the expense.  She noted that MGA is in litigation with its insurers, some of which have refused to cover all of its legal fees.

Hurst’s fee motion cited a news report estimating Mattel had spent $400 million in six years on the litigation.  “If Mattel wants to attack the amount of fees MGA has spent as being unreasonable, then it needs to come clean on what it spent,” she said during an interview.  U.S. District Judge David Carter ordered that a fee expert review billing records in the case.