Thieriot v. Laggner

Background

This was a breach-of-contract action by Juan Pablo Thieriot against William Laggner. In an earlier order, the court granted Thieriot’s motion for summary judgment and determined that he was entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. Thieriot then timely moved for attorney’s fees, costs, and prejudgment interest.

Laggner opposed the motion. He argued that Thieriot did not receive the right to attorney’s fees until a July 2023 assignment, that the requested fees should be substantially reduced, and that prejudgment interest should begin on a later date.

Entitlement to Fees

The court held that Thieriot’s right to fees covered the entire litigation. The court had already found that a March 8, 2020 assignment was valid. That assignment transferred rights under the Settlement Agreement, and the agreement provided that the prevailing party in litigation concerning the agreement could recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. The court therefore reiterated that Thieriot could recover reasonable fees incurred throughout the action. The court declined to examine whether the later July 2023 assignment could apply retroactively because the March 2020 assignment independently covered the entire Settlement Agreement.

Review of the Requested Fees

A reasonable fee award is generally calculated by multiplying a reasonable hourly rate by the reasonable number of hours worked. Thieriot submitted billing records describing the work performed, and Laggner challenged the records on several grounds, including block billing, vague entries, administrative work, work on the withdrawn conversion claim, duplication, inconsistent entries, and partner time spent on simple legal work. Laggner sought an across-the-board 30% reduction.

The court did not impose the requested 30% reduction. It found that the block billing was sufficiently detailed to permit meaningful review. It also found that the challenged entries involving review of court submissions, communications with opposing counsel, and document preparation reflected substantive attorney work rather than purely clerical work. The court rejected the argument that deposition attendance by both an associate and a partner was improperly duplicative, and it found that the distribution of work between the partner and associates was not unreasonable.

The court did, however, reduce the award for one vague entry and for work on the withdrawn conversion claim. It deducted $157.50 for a June 6, 2023 entry concerning an analysis between two colleagues because the entry did not identify the general subject matter. It also deducted $3,172.63 for time spent on the withdrawn conversion claim, calculated as 50% of specified block-billed entries.

From the requested $205,298.00 in attorney’s fees, the court awarded $201,967.87. It also awarded the undisputed costs of $4,899.01.

Prejudgment Interest

Under New York law, prejudgment interest on breach-of-contract damages generally begins when the breach occurs. The Settlement Agreement required Laggner to pay Thieriot his share of proceeds from sales of the Laggner Shares within three business days after Laggner received those proceeds. The court concluded that the applicable breach occurred on the fourth day after Laggner received each payment and failed to pay Thieriot.

Because the proceeds were received at different times, the court calculated interest on separate portions of the $140,000 in damages: $5,000 from November 26, 2021; $5,000 from December 13, 2021; $5,000 from December 21, 2021; $62,500 from January 18, 2022; and $62,500 from February 3, 2022. Interest was set at New York’s 9% annual rate and was to run until judgment was entered.

Disposition

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke granted Thieriot’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs with reductions. The court awarded $201,967.87 in fees, $4,899.01 in costs, and prejudgment interest calculated at 9% from the dates specified in the court’s order until entry of judgment. The clerk was directed to terminate the relevant motion and close the case.