Polee v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority

Background

Keith Polee sued Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCCTA) after CCCTA terminated his employment as a bus driver. The complaint alleged that a passenger directed racial epithets and death threats at Polee and that CCCTA failed to protect African-American employees and passengers from racial hostility. It also alleged wrongful termination, retaliation, and violations of federal and state employment laws, including Title VII, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and other laws.

After discovery and three settlement conferences, CCCTA made an offer under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 for $250,000. Polee accepted the offer, and judgment was entered on March 10, 2020. CCCTA paid the judgment on July 2, 2020. The parties were unable to resolve Polee’s request for attorneys’ fees, costs, and post-judgment interest.

Fee request and parties’ arguments

Polee sought fees under the fee-shifting provisions of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and other laws underlying his complaint. Under the lodestar method, a court calculates a fee by multiplying the reasonable hours worked by a reasonable hourly rate. Polee requested merits fees based on 337.8 hours at an $850 hourly rate, a 1.3 multiplier, costs, post-judgment fees, and interest.

CCCTA did not dispute that Polee was the prevailing party or that he was entitled to reasonable fees and costs. It argued instead that the requested hourly rate and hours were unreasonable, that a multiplier was unwarranted, and that interest should be calculated using a different rate.

Court’s analysis

The court found that Polee’s lawyer, Jeremy Friedman, had shown that an $850 hourly rate was reasonable. The court relied on Friedman’s experience, his actual billing rate for non-contingent work, and declarations from other Bay Area attorneys. The court found that CCCTA’s survey evidence did not adequately account for attorneys’ experience, skill, reputation, or the nature of the work performed.

The court also found that the requested hours were reasonable overall. It rejected CCCTA’s comparison between the hours billed by Polee’s lawyer and the combined hours billed by CCCTA’s lawyers, noting that opposing parties may have different responsibilities and access to information. The court accepted reductions made by Polee’s counsel and deducted four additional hours for work concerning the applicable interest rate.

The court awarded a multiplier, an increase to the basic lodestar amount, because of the case’s contingent risk, the work that the litigation prevented counsel from undertaking, the result obtained, and the public benefit. It applied a 1.2 multiplier rather than the requested 1.3 because CCCTA was a public entity and settled before motion practice or trial.

Ruling

The order is titled “ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS.” In the body and conclusion, however, the court states that it “GRANTS” the motion and awards the following: $344,556 in merits fees, based on 337.8 hours at $850 per hour with a 1.2 multiplier; $81,600 in post-judgment fees, based on 96 hours at $850 per hour; and $13,900 in costs. These amounts total $440,056.

The court also ruled that post-judgment interest on the $250,000 judgment must be calculated under the federal rate in 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a), rather than the higher California rate urged by Polee. The award covered 114 days of interest, from entry of judgment until payment.