Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 30, 2020

Ekukpe v. City Of New York

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:16-cv-05412
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
6
Section 1983Civil RightsFee Petition
In one sentence

In Ekukpe v. Santiago, Judge Torres granted Ekukpe’s supplemental fee motion, awarding $97,702.50 in fees and $838.34 in expenses.

Who this affects

David Ekukpe received an award of $97,702.50 in attorney’s fees and $838.34 in litigation expenses. The order concerns his fee claim arising from his civil-rights case against NYPD Officer Juan Santiago and NYPD Sgt. John Ferrara.

What happened

In David Ekukpe v. NYPD Officer Juan Santiago and NYPD Sgt. John Ferrara, David Ekukpe sought additional attorney’s fees after successfully defending part of his civil-rights case on appeal. The court had previously awarded fees in part and denied them in part.

The court found that the lawyers’ hourly rates and documented time were reasonable. It calculated fees of $97,702.50 and approved $838.34 for documented printing and court-filing expenses.

Judge Analisa Torres granted Ekukpe’s supplemental motion and awarded a total of $98,540.84.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Ekukpe v. City Of New York · No. 1:16-cv-05412
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Nov. 30, 2020

Background

David Ekukpe brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York law against NYPD Officer Juan Santiago and NYPD Sgt. John Ferrara. The claims included excessive force, false arrest, malicious prosecution, denial of the right to a fair trial, failure to intervene, and retaliation for exercising First Amendment rights. The City of New York and NYPD Officer Osvaldo Hernandez were also originally named but were voluntarily dismissed by stipulation.

After a jury trial, the jury found Ferrara liable for excessive force and awarded $1 in nominal damages and $500 in punitive damages on that claim. It found both defendants liable for false arrest, federal malicious prosecution, state-law malicious prosecution, denial of the right to a fair trial, and failure to intervene, with the damages described in the opinion. The jury found neither defendant liable for retaliation. The court later granted Ferrara’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on the failure-to-intervene claim, denied the defendants’ motions for a new trial and remittitur, and the Second Circuit affirmed that order.

The court had previously granted in part and denied in part Ekukpe’s motion for attorney’s fees. After the appeal, Ekukpe filed the supplemental fee motion addressed in this order.

Legal standard

Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, a prevailing party in certain civil-rights cases may receive a reasonable attorney’s fee. The court used the “lodestar” method: a reasonable hourly rate multiplied by a reasonable number of hours. The fee applicant must document the hours and rates, and the court may exclude excessive, redundant, or unnecessary time. Adjustments to the lodestar are appropriate only in rare circumstances.

Hourly rates and hours

The court had previously approved hourly rates of $450 for Edward Sivin, Glenn Miller, and John Knudsen, and $75 for Jake Ethé. Ekukpe requested compensation for 31.8 hours by Sivin, 7 hours by Miller, 177.5 hours by Knudsen, and 4.9 hours by Ethé. The court found the time records adequate and the hours reasonable. The defendants did not contest the hours.

Calculation and ruling

The court calculated $97,335.00 for 216.3 hours worked by Sivin, Miller, and Knudsen at $450 per hour, plus $367.50 for Ethé’s 4.9 hours at $75 per hour. The resulting lodestar was $97,702.50. The court found no rare circumstance requiring an adjustment.

Judge Analisa Torres granted Ekukpe’s supplemental motion for attorney’s fees. The court awarded $97,702.50 in attorney’s fees and $838.34 in litigation expenses, for a total award of $98,540.84.

The authoritative version

Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.