Christoff v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America

Background

Michael J. Christoff applied for attorney’s fees under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, a federal law governing employee-benefit plans. The application followed the court’s September 2019 order, which partly granted Christoff’s summary-judgment motion, dismissed Unum’s cross-motion for summary judgment, awarded Christoff damages on Count I, and dismissed Count II. The earlier order also determined that Christoff was entitled to reasonable fees and costs and directed the parties to provide materials about the amount.

Christoff requested $206,123.50 in attorney’s fees for 489 hours worked by three attorneys, using rates of $470, $450, and $385 per hour. He also requested $1,448.45 in costs for court fees and transcripts. Unum contested the fee calculations and argued that the request included unreasonable hourly rates, duplicative work, excessive time, administrative and clerical tasks performed by attorneys, work on unsuccessful or abandoned arguments, and time spent preparing the fee application. Unum proposed a total reasonable fee of $50,045.05.

Legal standard

The court explained that the starting point for calculating attorney’s fees is the “lodestar”: the number of hours reasonably worked multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate. The court may exclude excessive, redundant, unnecessary, vague, or clerical work. It also considers the results obtained and the plaintiff’s overall success, along with other factors concerning the difficulty of the case, the attorneys’ experience, customary rates, and similar awards.

Court’s reasoning

The court recognized that the case involved a lengthy record and lasted more than two years. It nevertheless found that the record’s length did not justify paying for all of the time requested, particularly because the attorneys billed hourly and the case overlapped with another pending matter. The court also noted that several arguments failed or were abandoned, that some work was duplicative, and that attorneys performed administrative and clerical tasks.

The court found persuasive an earlier decision concerning a fee request by Christoff’s lead counsel and a co-counsel in another Employee Retirement Income Security Act case. The court concluded that the requested rates and hours should be reduced. It did not rely heavily on Unum’s objection to “block billing,” meaning grouping multiple tasks into one time entry, because the entries generally provided enough information to identify the work performed.

For lead attorney Nolan, the court reduced the rate to $350 per hour and reduced the hours by 40 percent, producing an adjusted lodestar of $43,575. For Galman, it reduced the rate to $320 per hour and the hours by 40 percent, producing $53,395.20. For Tataryn, it reduced the rate to $320 per hour but found that her billed time was reasonable, producing $1,088. The total fee award was $98,058.20. The court found that no additional overall reduction was warranted. It also found the requested costs reasonable and supported by the record.

Disposition

The court’s introduction states that Christoff’s application was granted in part and denied in part. The order states that the request for attorney’s fees was granted in part and awards $98,058.20 in attorney’s fees and $1,448.45 in costs. The court also adopted Unum’s uncontested calculation that unpaid benefits and interest totaled $636,175.89 and awarded that amount, plus the additional amount owed for the period through the order date calculated in the same manner. Judge Donovan W. Frank directed that judgment be entered accordingly.