Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 25, 2021

Billybey Marina Services, LLC v. Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc.

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:20-cv-04922
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
12
Fee PetitionContractCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Billybey Marina v. Bouchard, Judge Swain awarded Billybey $34,470 in attorneys’ fees for enforcing their settlement agreement.

Who this affects

Billybey Marina Services, LLC received the attorneys’ fee award, and Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc. and the other defendants were ordered to pay it.

What happened

Billybey Marina Services sued Bouchard Transportation and related defendants after vessels allegedly stayed at Billybey’s pier after their docking permits expired. The parties settled, and the settlement agreement allowed the winning party in an enforcement action to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees.

After finding that the defendants had not complied with the settlement, the court considered Billybey’s request for $34,470 in fees. The defendants challenged the requested rates and hours, including time spent on bankruptcy issues, administrative work, block billing, and preparing the fee request.

In Billybey Marina Services, LLC v. Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc., Judge Laura Taylor Swain approved all requested hourly rates and hours and awarded Billybey $34,470 in attorneys’ fees. The defendants were ordered to pay by November 1, 2021.

The detailed version

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

Case
Billybey Marina Services, LLC v. Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-04922
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 25, 2021

Background

Billybey Marina Services, LLC sued Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc. and related defendants for breach of contract. Billybey alleged that the defendants, who had contracted to store vessels at Billybey’s pier, failed to leave their berths after their docking permits expired.

The parties entered into a Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release on November 24, 2020. The agreement stated that, in a legal action arising from or seeking to enforce the agreement, the prevailing party could recover its costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees. The court later entered a dismissal with prejudice and retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.

Billybey then moved to enforce the agreement, asserting that the defendants had breached it. In a January 14, 2021 order, the court directed the defendants to comply with the agreement and ruled that Billybey would receive its legal costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses. The present order determined the amount of that award.

Parties’ Positions

Billybey requested $34,470 for 65.7 hours of work by three maritime attorneys, two bankruptcy attorneys, and a paralegal. The work included communications about enforcing the agreement, analysis of how the bankruptcy proceeding affected enforcement, preparation of the enforcement motion, and preparation of the fee request.

The defendants did not dispute that the settlement agreement authorized recovery of attorneys’ fees for enforcement. They disputed the reasonableness of the requested rates and hours. They argued that bankruptcy attorneys’ time was unrelated and unnecessary, that partners billed for clerical tasks, that some entries used improper block billing, and that some time spent on communications and internal matters was excessive. They also argued that the enforcement motion was unnecessary because they were complying, or had reasons for not complying, with the agreement.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that the usual federal rule requires each party to pay its own legal fees, but parties may create a contractual right to fees. Because the settlement agreement expressly allowed recovery of reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred to enforce it, the court applied the lodestar method, which generally calculates a fee by multiplying a reasonable hourly rate by the reasonable hours worked.

The court approved the requested hourly rates. It found that the $525 hourly rates for maritime attorneys Christopher Raleigh, Geoffrey Ferrer, and Anne Mickey were reasonable given their experience, qualifications, and the complexity of the case. It also approved rates of $630 for Eric Scherling and $815 for John Carroll, finding them reasonable for experienced bankruptcy attorneys handling a complex matter. The court approved the paralegal rate of $265, although it described that rate as being at the high end of typical rates.

The court also approved all 65.7 hours claimed. It found that bankruptcy counsel’s work was necessary to assess the legal effect of the bankruptcy stay on enforcement, particularly because defense counsel had asserted that the stay prevented the district court from hearing the fee matter. The court found no specific evidence that partners had billed for clerical work.

The court likewise declined to reduce the award for block billing. Block billing means combining multiple tasks in one billing entry. The court found that the entries were detailed, identified the time, date, and subject matter, and did not show independently unreasonable hours or an effort to hide improper charges. The court also found that the time spent preparing the fee application was compensable under the settlement agreement, including 4.2 hours for the supporting declaration and 3.6 hours for the reply.

The court rejected the defendants’ arguments that the enforcement motion was unnecessary or that their noncompliance had good reasons. It treated those arguments as an attempt to revisit the merits of the earlier enforcement ruling rather than as relevant objections to calculating the fee award.

Disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain awarded Billybey Marina Services, LLC $34,470 in attorneys’ fees. The award consisted of $26,880 for Raleigh, $4,777.50 for Ferrer, $577.50 for Mickey, $371 for Kaller, $1,701 for Scherling, and $163 for Carroll. The defendants were ordered to pay by November 1, 2021.

The authoritative version

Read the full 12-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.