The issue focused on the amount of public interest and government assistance the state is providing to legal professionals. The attorneys representing the plaintiffs argued that an expert witness in the case would not be paid if he did not testify against the plaintiffs. The state countered that such a request would require evidence that the plaintiff did not receive the help the attorney is billing the state for, because he would need to pay the expert costs of handling such evidence.


The case has a series of hearings scheduled this week in federal court.