Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 23, 2021

Juscinska v. Meson Sevilla, ltd.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:19-cv-05284-RA
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Fee PetitionADA / Disability
In one sentence

In Juscinska v. Meson Sevilla, Judge Abrams awarded an ADA plaintiff $6,450 in attorneys’ fees and $516 in litigation costs after default judgment.

Who this affects

Natalia Juscinska received an award of $6,450 in attorneys’ fees and $516 in litigation costs. Meson Sevilla, Ltd. and 344 Westside Properties, LLC are the defendants against whom the award was entered.

What happened

Natalia Juscinska sued Meson Sevilla, Ltd. and 344 Westside Properties, LLC, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act at the Meson Sevilla restaurant. The court entered default judgment for Juscinska, and she then requested attorneys’ fees and litigation costs.

The court found the requested award reasonable. It approved counsel’s $375 hourly rate and compensation for 17.2 hours of work, including preparing the complaint, serving papers, seeking default judgment, and attending a hearing. It also approved $516 in costs for the filing and service fees.

Judge Ronnie Abrams granted the unopposed motion and awarded Juscinska $6,450 in attorneys’ fees and $516 in litigation costs, for a total of $6,966. The court directed Juscinska to serve the order on the defendants.

The detailed version

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

Case
Juscinska v. Meson Sevilla, ltd. · No. 1:19-cv-05284-RA
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Feb. 23, 2021

Background

Natalia Juscinska brought an Americans with Disabilities Act case against Meson Sevilla, Ltd. and 344 Westside Properties, LLC, alleging violations at the Meson Sevilla restaurant in Manhattan. The court entered default judgment for Juscinska on January 8, 2020. Juscinska then moved for attorneys’ fees and costs. The motion was unopposed.

The court had previously held the motion in abeyance after learning of a possible error in the address on file for 344 Westside Properties, LLC. Juscinska served the relevant papers at additional addresses, and the court gave the defendants a final opportunity to appear. After the deadline passed, the court considered the motion.

Legal Standard

The court applied the “presumptively reasonable fee” method, also called the lodestar. That method calculates a fee by multiplying a reasonable hourly rate by a reasonable number of hours worked. The court also required contemporaneous time records showing the date, time spent, and nature of the work for each attorney seeking compensation.

Analysis

Juscinska requested $6,450 in attorneys’ fees and $516 in litigation costs, for a total of $6,966. Her attorney, Mr. Sekendiz, requested an hourly rate of $375. The court found that rate reasonable because it was within the range used in similar cases in the Southern District of New York and because Mr. Sekendiz had extensive litigation and Americans with Disabilities Act experience.

Juscinska documented 17.2 hours of work. The work included preparing and filing the complaint, serving the complaint and other court papers, moving for default judgment, and attending a December 2019 show-cause hearing. The court found the number of hours reasonable and not excessive, redundant, or unnecessary.

The court also approved $516 in litigation costs, consisting of the filing fee and a service fee. It concluded that the requested fees and costs were reasonable under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which permits a successful plaintiff to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

Disposition

Judge Ronnie Abrams granted the motion. The court awarded Juscinska $6,450 in attorneys’ fees and $516 in litigation costs, totaling $6,966. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion, and Juscinska was directed to serve a copy of the order on the defendants.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.