The Tribune contacted three law firms that submitted billings alleging someone had worked more than 24 hours in a day, and each acknowledged making at least one mistake. In the cases where the errors cost the city extra money, the firms said they made corrections.<\/p>\n
The firm Borkan & Scahill, which was responsible for more than half of the 24-hour-plus billings, also told the Tribune in a statement that some entries filed under one person\u2019s name included work performed by others \u2014 a practice the city said is not allowed under its rules. Most involved paralegal tasks.<\/p>\n
City Corporation Counsel Mary Richardson-Lowry declined the Tribune\u2019s request for an interview. But the law department, in a statement<\/a>, confirmed it had clawed back money from some firms because of the Tribune\u2019s reporting.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen questions arose about billing practices, we addressed them directly,\u201d the law department statement said. \u201cIn a subset of outside counsel invoices, some billing entries required clarification and review. We met directly with outside counsel firms to reinforce expectations about billing accuracy, staffing, and case management.\u201d<\/p>\n The department did not directly respond to questions the Tribune sent in February about how the city could have let obviously questionable entries slip through in the first place.<\/p>\n In a written statement Tuesday, the department said \u201cinvoices that exceed the hours in a day are intolerable\u201d but rare and \u201cnot a systemic issue.\u201d More broadly, the law department told the Tribune earlier that it has been working toward a better process to vet bills submitted by its outside attorneys. Late last month, the department modified its guidance for outside law firms to clarify expectations about working excess hours.<\/p>\n \u201cWe take seriously our obligation to use taxpayer dollars responsibly, both as attorneys sworn to uphold the law and as taxpayers ourselves,\u201d it said in one statement.<\/p>\n Impossible shifts<\/p>\n Like other major clients of private law firms, the city requires invoices to be filed electronically. They are typically filed monthly for each case and list the number of hours worked by each attorney or other employee, called \u201ctimekeepers\u201d in the system, as well as reimbursable expenses such as travel or supplies.<\/p>\n Attorney-client privilege typically shields most details about the legal work each timekeeper performs, but the Tribune was able to obtain other billing and payment data from the city under Illinois\u2019 Freedom of Information Act.<\/p>\n For the years 2016 through 2025, the Tribune wrote computer programming code to identify instances where a firm\u2019s invoice or invoices claimed one of its employees had worked more than 24 hours in a day. Some billings where the amount charged wasn\u2019t enough to cover the number of hours logged were then omitted from the analysis. For example, the data showed one firm charged the city $627 for a lawyer said to have worked 571 hours one day, an entry that made little sense but was not costly for the city.<\/p>\n In other cases, the Tribune couldn\u2019t confirm the city had paid the bill. That left 40 entries from six law firms where someone was logged as working more than 24 hours in a day and the city still paid for that time at the staffer\u2019s full rate.<\/p>\n More than half of those billings occurred in the past two years and involved hours logged for two employees of Borkan & Scahill. Their names and timekeeper codes were logged as working more than 24 hours on a total of 22 separate days.<\/p>\n In a statement to the Tribune, the law firm said those two staffers oversaw a group of paralegals whose work on various cases was coded under the staffers\u2019 names.<\/p>\n \u201cBecause of varying needs throughout the year, we do not input a dozen or more separate timekeeper codes for every single paralegal we use on every single file,\u201d the statement said. \u201cRather, we use the general timekeeper codes of our head paralegals to document these services on invoices.\u201d<\/p>\n The city\u2019s rules for its outside lawyers<\/a> specify that firms are expected to list the \u201cName or Timekeeper ID of the person(s) who performed the work billed.\u201d<\/p>\n In another set of entries, the Tribune noticed one of the firm\u2019s attorneys was logged as working more than 28 hours one day in 2024. Borkan & Scahill told the Tribune it brought on two other attorneys to help with cases during a busy week, and those hours were logged under the name of an attorney already approved under the city\u2019s billing system to work on those cases.<\/p>\n \u201cWe endeavor on the front end of each case retention to accurately predict the number and identity of attorneys who may be necessary to perform all tasks necessary in each matter,\u201d the firm said in its statement. But in \u201cexceedingly infrequent instances,\u201d it said, the firm has found it necessary to have other lawyers \u201chandle certain tasks on an emergency basis.\u201d The city has approved those attorneys as timekeepers on other cases, it noted.<\/p>\n
![\"From](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/CTC-L-outside-counsel-dirksen-01_260926346.jpg\")
Josh Engquist of The Sotos Law Firm, Whitney Hutchinson of Borkan & Scahill and Eileen Rosen of Rock Fusco & Connelly leave the federal courthouse after a March 24, 2026, hearing in a reversed-conviction case. More than 200 attorneys from private firms have fought such lawsuits on behalf of the city since 2016. (Brian Cassella\/Chicago Tribune)<\/p>\n