Martin v. Hadix

Summary

The Court held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act's attorney-fee cap does not apply to postjudgment monitoring work performed before the Act's effective date, because applying it to completed work would have retroactive effect absent a clear congressional directive. The cap does apply to monitoring work performed after the effective date because attorneys had notice of the reduced rate before undertaking that future work. Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justice Stevens, would have held the cap inapplicable to cases commenced before the Act, while Justice Scalia concurred in the judgment on the ground that the relevant conduct was the performance of legal work.