Grano v. Martin

Background

Grano brought a case under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction seeking the child’s return to Spain from the United States. After a bench trial, Judge Seibel granted the petition. Martin appealed, but the Second Circuit affirmed. The child was later returned to Spain accompanied by Martin.

Grano then moved for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting $467,944.46: $359,799.05 in fees and $108,145.41 in costs. Martin opposed the request, arguing that an award would be inappropriate because of abuse she said Grano had inflicted and her indigent financial condition. She also challenged the necessity and reasonableness of the hours, billing rates, documentation, and expenses.

A magistrate judge recommended granting the motion in part and denying it in part. The recommendation included reduced hourly rates, a reduction for vague billing entries, exclusion of work connected to related state Family Court proceedings, reductions for unclear or commingled entries, and reductions or exclusions for certain costs. It also recommended an 85% equitable reduction because of Martin’s inability to pay. Both parties objected.

Attorney’s Fees

The court explained that the International Child Abduction Remedies Act generally requires an order for necessary expenses when a court orders a child’s return, unless the respondent shows that an award would be clearly inappropriate. A prevailing petitioner’s entitlement is presumptive but remains subject to equitable considerations. The court calculated a reasonable fee using the “lodestar,” meaning a reasonable hourly rate multiplied by a reasonable number of hours, followed by any appropriate adjustment.

The court set the following hourly rates: $400 for Barry Abbott, $425 for Jeremy Morley, $375 each for Neil Saltzman, Alexis Cirel, and Daniella Schneider, and $129 each for paralegals Brenda Mileo and Fritz Capria. It found that retaining multiple attorneys was reasonable given the complexity and compressed schedule of the Hague Convention case.

The court increased the reduction for vague entries by Abbott and his staff from 5% to 10%. It held that fees and costs for the related state proceedings were not necessary to the federal case and therefore were not recoverable. For entries that were unclear or commingled between the state and federal proceedings, however, the court applied a 50% reduction rather than excluding them entirely.

These calculations produced $183,686.42 in compensable fees.

Costs

The court excused Grano’s failure to comply with the timing and formal bill-of-costs requirements of Local Civil Rule 54.1 because he could not finalize return-related costs until the child was returned and he filed the motion promptly afterward. The court found that the information supplied with the motion was sufficient and that the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, rather than the local rule, provided the substantive basis for recovering costs.

The court reduced counsel-paid costs for photocopying and scanning by 90% because the documentation did not identify their purpose. It then applied a 50% reduction to account for costs that could not be distinguished between the state and federal proceedings, resulting in $6,692.11 in recoverable counsel-paid costs. The court accepted translation and transcription expenses as generally reasonable but applied a 30% reduction to account for state-proceeding work.

The court also reduced Grano’s out-of-pocket expenses by €3,340.85 for parents’ travel connected to proceedings where their attendance was not necessary and excluded $2,464.86 for hotel stays for Grano’s attorneys because the court found those stays unnecessary. It calculated recoverable out-of-pocket costs of $38,262.72.

Together, the reasonable fees and costs totaled $228,641.25 before equitable adjustment.

Equitable Reduction

Martin argued that Grano’s coercive control and psychological abuse made any award clearly inappropriate. The court recognized that the alleged coercive control was serious domestic abuse but concluded that this case, which involved primarily psychological rather than physical abuse and in which both sides were less than candid, did not justify completely denying fees. The court also noted that awarding at least some expenses served the statutory purpose of deterring future child abductions.

The court agreed that Martin’s financial hardship required a substantial reduction. The opinion states that Martin had been unable to obtain employment in Spain because she was not a legal resident there, owed her attorneys more than $170,000, reported no savings, assets, or property, had bank balances of $395.10 and $3,255.36, and had net income of approximately $27,551 in 2019. The court concluded that she could not pay the unreduced award of $228,641.25.

Disposition

Judge Seibel adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation except for the modifications described in the opinion. The court granted in part Grano’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs and ordered Martin to remit $34,296.19 to Grano. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion.