In Biery v. United States, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the district court has the discretion to choose between the Adjusted Laffey Matrix and the Kavanaugh Matrix as a starting point to calculate attorneys' fees. The district court, however, must consider all relevant facts and circumstances and explain its reasons for the attorneys' fees awarded. ( (Fed. Cir. Mar. 23, 2016).)

In 2007, the United States converted a rail corridor owned by Dorothy Biery and 12 other Kansas landowners into a trail under the National Trail Systems Act (16 U.S.C. § 1247(d)). The landowners sued the US in the Court of Federal Claims, alleging a taking without just compensation in violation of their Fifth Amendment rights.

In 2012, the district court granted summary judgment for 8 of the 13 landowners. Counsel for the successful plaintiffs requested attorneys' fees under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. § 4654(c)). Counsel requested $2,017,987 in attorneys' fees using the Kavanaugh Matrix, which is calculated based upon changes to the Legal Services Index component of the national Consumer Price Index.

For the work counsel performed in Washington DC, the Court of Federal Claims used the Adjusted Laffey Matrix rate, which is calculated based upon changes to the cost of living in the Washington, DC area, as measured by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. The district court found that its award would adequately compensate counsel without creating a windfall, and noted that fees awarded to counsel's firm in two other district court cases had also used the Adjusted Laffey Matrix.

Counsel appealed, arguing that the district court abused its discretion by using the Adjusted Laffey Matrix, rather than the Kavanaugh Matrix, to calculate fees for its Washington, DC work. In a case of first impression, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that district courts may apply either the Adjusted Laffey Matrix or the Kavanaugh Matrix to determine attorney fee awards. The Federal Circuit observed that:

The Federal Circuit held that it is within the discretion of the district court to use either matrix, as long as the court provides clear and concise reasons for its fee award. In this case, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's fee determination because the district court sufficiently explained that using the Adjusted Laffey Matrix would compensate counsel fairly, without providing a windfall.