DEAN D. PREGERSON, District Judge.
Presently before the court is Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys' Fees. Having considered the submissions of the parties, including Plaintiff's supplemental motion, the court adopts the following Order.
Plaintiff brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging constitutional violations related to his initial detention by police and by their subsequent use of force upon him, as well as later malicious prosecution. Defendants moved for partial summary judgment on the claims pertaining to the initial detention and malicious prosecution. This court, although holding that the detention violated the Fourth Amendment, granted Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. (Dkt. 56 at 9-10.) The court also granted the motion with respect to Plaintiff's malicious prosecution claim. (
After a three-day trial, the jury found that Plaintiff had been arrested without probable cause and subjected to unreasonable force, and awarded Plaintiff $900,000.00 in compensatory damages. Plaintiff later accepted a remittitur in the sum of $500,000. Plaintiff now moves for attorneys' fees and costs.
A district court may, in its discretion, award a reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party in Section 1983 litigation. 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b). Under Section 1988, "a prevailing plaintiff should ordinarily recover an attorney's fee unless special circumstances would render such an award unjust."
The "starting point for determining the amount of a reasonable fee is the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate."
One of Defendants' primary objections to the fees sought is that Plaintiff seeks fees related to the motion for summary judgment, even though the court ruled in favor of Defendants with respect to that motion. Attorney's fees, however, are not necessarily limited to work performed on successful claims. "A plaintiff who is unsuccessful at a stage of litigation that was a necessary step to her ultimate victory is entitled to attorney's fees even for the unsuccessful stage."
The
The court therefore must, on the second step of the
The court must then determine the lodestar product of reasonable hours at a reasonable rate. "[T]he fee applicant bears the burden of establishing entitlement to an award and documenting the appropriate hours expended . . . and should maintain billing time records in a manner that will enable a reviewing court to identify distinct claims."
With respect to Mr. Conlogue, the court finds the hours billed in connection with Defendants' successful summary judgment motion excessive. The court finds thirty hours a reasonable expenditure of time on those matters. With respect to Mr. Avina, the court finds the amount of time spent practicing cross examination excessive, and subtracts the twenty-five hours expended for that purpose. The court also finds that 10 hours would have been sufficient to prepare cross examinations of the Defendants, rather than the 23.1 hours sought. The court further finds the 1.8 hours spent drafting a timeline of a short surveillance video to be excessive, and that 0.8 hours would have sufficed. Lastly, the court finds $592.51 in out of pocket costs untimely submitted. With respect to Mr. Beck, 0.3 of the hours billed appear to be unrelated to this matter. The court also finds 0.4 hours spent agreeing to an extension of time and noting a new appearance on behalf of Defendants to be unreasonable. It further appears that Mr. Beck unreasonably billed, after he no longer represented Plaintiff, for 1.7 hours of work unrelated to the determination of his fees.
As to the determination of a reasonable rate for the work performed, it is Plaintiff's burden to show that the hourly rates his counsel seeks are in line with the rates charged for similar services by attorneys in this district of comparable skill, experience, and reputation.
For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs' Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs is GRANTED, in part. Mr. Conlogue reasonably expended 369.6 hours at $275 per hour, plus 8.9 paralegal work hours at $125 per hour, plus $116.70 in out-of-pocket costs, for a total of $102,869.20. Mr. Avina reasonably expended 204.7 hours at $400 per hour, plus 5.5 paralegal hours at $125 per hour, plus $753 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of of $83,320. Mr. Beck reasonably expended 103.4 hours at $700 per hour, plus $5,735.42 in out-of-pocket costs, for a total of $78,115.42.