Lichter v. Bureau Of Accounts Control, Inc.

Background

Joseph Lichter sued Bureau of Accounts Control, Inc. (BAC), a debt collection agency, under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The court previously granted Lichter’s motion for summary judgment, finding that undisputed facts showed he did not owe a debt to Bergen Urological and that BAC violated the FDCPA by mailing him a letter seeking to collect that alleged debt. The court later denied BAC’s motion for reconsideration.

Lichter then moved for statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. The parties were unable to reach an agreement on those issues. Lichter requested $1,000 in statutory damages, compensation for his lawyers’ work, and $530 in costs.

Statutory Damages

The FDCPA allows up to $1,000 in additional statutory damages. In setting the amount, the court considered the frequency and persistence of the violations, their nature, and whether they were intentional.

The opinion states that BAC allegedly sent two letters and made one phone call to Lichter’s wife in violation of the FDCPA. The court found no evidence that the violations were intentional or that the communications were threatening or abusive. However, BAC’s own records should have alerted it that the letter to Lichter was inaccurate. The court also considered BAC’s decision to pursue the collection matter and litigate aggressively despite those records. It awarded Lichter $750 in statutory damages rather than the $1,000 maximum.

Attorney’s Fees

The FDCPA permits a prevailing plaintiff to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and litigation costs. The court used the “lodestar” method, which calculates a presumptively reasonable fee by multiplying reasonable hourly rates by the reasonable number of hours worked.

The court rejected BAC’s argument that Lichter was not fully successful. It found that Lichter did not seek actual damages and was fully successful on his FDCPA claim. The court also rejected BAC’s argument concerning the lack of class certification, explaining that BAC could have made a settlement offer to Lichter individually because no class had been certified.

The court found that Lichter provided sufficiently detailed time and cost records. It also rejected BAC’s objections that the records were not shown to be contemporaneous and that individual declarations from every attorney were required. The court accepted a declaration from Craig B. Sanders concerning the firm’s billing records and procedures.

The court approved these hourly rates: $450 for partners; $325 for associate Jonathan Cader; $300 for associate Erica Carvajal; $225 for associates Jitesh Dudani and Joenni Abreu; and $100 for paralegal work. For Carvajal’s 2.7 hours of travel time, the court reduced the compensation to 50% of the approved $300 hourly rate, or $150 per hour.

Although the court noted that a routine FDCPA case ordinarily could be handled by fewer lawyers in fewer hours, it awarded fees for all 101.7 requested billable hours. The court found that BAC’s aggressive litigation had drawn out what should have been a routine case. The opinion does not state a single total dollar amount for the attorney’s-fee award.

Costs and Disposition

The court awarded the requested $530 in costs: $400 for the filing fee, $75 for service of process, and $55 for courthouse parking.

The court’s conclusion states that Lichter’s motion for attorney’s fees was GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Specifically, Lichter received $750 in statutory damages, $530 in costs, and attorney’s fees for 101.7 hours at the rates approved by the court, with travel time compensated at 50% of the reasonable rate. The Clerk was directed to issue judgment, terminate the motion, and close the case.