S.J. v. New York City Department of Education

Background

The New York City Department of Education submitted a letter opposing the plaintiff’s letter motion to exceed page limits and to submit additional declarations in connection with the plaintiff’s attorney-fee application. The Department also asked the court to require the plaintiff to discuss two issues in her reply papers.

First, the Department argued that the plaintiff had not addressed decisions from the Southern District of New York setting hourly rates for staff at the Cuddy Law Firm, or explained why a cited report and recommendation was not persuasive. Second, it asked the plaintiff to explain why the Department’s written offer of $14,750 in August 2019 would not have fairly compensated the work performed through that date.

The Department also argued that the plaintiff had not followed the judge’s individual practices because she did not identify the proposed declarants, describe their subjects, or explain why the additional submissions would help the court evaluate the fee application. The letter discussed a chart of data prepared by plaintiff’s counsel and prior discovery that Judge Schofield had denied, but the endorsement did not rule on those matters.

Ruling

Judge Stewart D. Aaron denied the Department’s request to compel the plaintiff to include a discussion of the two specified issues in her reply papers. The opinion text does not state a ruling on the plaintiff’s request to exceed page limits, the request to submit additional declarations, or the amount of attorney’s fees.