Plaintiff successfully sued defendant for violating a conservation easement on his property. The trial court awarded plaintiff $2.9 million in attorney fees for five years of hard-fought litigation and a 19-day trial. This decision affirms the award. Plaintiff could recover fees for all hours spent by its attorneys though the first $500,000 in fees was paid for by its insurance. The plaintiff need not be personally liable for the fees in order to collect fees, and the award would not over-compensate the plaintiff as it had to reimburse the insurer from the fee award. In seeking fees, plaintiff voluntarily reduced its hours by 10% to account for any inefficiency. Defendant didn’t show that the reduction was insufficient or point to any particular hours that were misspent. A few remarks by the trial court in hurrying along the presentation of evidence at trial did not disclose any inefficiency in the prior five years of litigation. A 1.4 multiplier was justified by the contingency risk despite the fact that the first quarter of fees incurred had not been contingent but were paid by insurance. The trial court didn’t double count skill and expertise which can properly be used to increase hourly rate or multiplier just so long as the factor isn’t double counted. Here, the trial court was well aware of that rule and found that skill and expertise weren’t fully compensated by the hourly rate, but also justified an enhancement.