Bowman v. Receivables Performance Management LLC
- Laura Swain
- 1:20-cv-01779-LTS
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Bowman v. Receivables Performance Management LLC, Judge Swain awarded $27,983.90 in fees and costs after Bowman’s Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case.
Daniella I. Bowman received $27,557.50 in attorneys’ fees and $426.40 in costs from Receivables Performance Management LLC.
What happened
In Bowman v. Receivables Performance Management LLC, Daniella I. Bowman asked the court to reimburse her for the legal fees and costs of bringing her debt-collection case to judgment. The court noted that Bowman substantially prevailed on her main claim that RPM’s correspondence violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and that she received $500 in statutory damages.
The court reduced the requested legal fees because the lawyers’ hourly rates were high compared with local rates, the case had been staffed by several attorneys, and the billing information contained discrepancies. It approved hourly rates ranging from $100 to $425 and applied additional reductions to the requested hours. RPM did not oppose reimbursement of the $426.40 in costs.
Judge Swain awarded Bowman $27,557.50 in attorneys’ fees and $426.40 in costs, for a total award of $27,983.90. The order resolved docket entry no. 52.
The detailed version
- Bowman v. Receivables Performance Management LLC · No. 1:20-cv-01779-LTS
- Laura Swain
- May 3, 2022
Background
Daniella I. Bowman sought attorneys’ fees and litigation costs under section 1692k(a)(3) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2). She requested $38,563.90 in attorneys’ fees for 110 billed hours, using hourly rates ranging from $100 for paralegal work to $450 for partner work. She also requested $426.40 in costs, consisting of a $400 filing fee and $26.40 in service-of-process fees.
The opinion states that Bowman substantially prevailed on her principal claim that Receivables Performance Management LLC’s correspondence violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Bowman received $500 in statutory damages out of a possible $1,000. The defendant had filed an unsuccessful cross-motion for summary judgment and argued that Bowman’s requested hours were unreasonable, excessive, and redundant. It also challenged the adequacy of the billing records.
Court’s Analysis
Courts generally calculate a reasonable fee by multiplying a reasonable hourly rate by the number of reasonably expended hours. The court found that the requested rates were at the high end of, or above, rates previously approved in Fair Debt Collection Practices Act cases in the New York City metropolitan area. It approved rates of $100 for paralegal time, $225 for the junior associates, $300 for attorney Jonathan Cader, and $425 for attorneys Craig Sanders and David Barshay.
The court found that Bowman’s counsel had generally and reasonably spent the hours claimed, particularly in light of the defendant’s litigation efforts. It nevertheless imposed a 10% reduction for seemingly excessive staffing of the relatively straightforward case and another 10% reduction for discrepancies between the firm’s billing representations. These reductions were in addition to 10.1 hours that counsel had already removed from the request. The court also found that the declarations and itemized billing records were sufficient evidence of the services performed.
The court found the requested costs reimbursable. The defendant did not oppose that portion of the request.
Disposition
The court awarded Bowman $27,557.50 in attorneys’ fees and $426.40 in costs, for a total award of $27,983.90, under 15 U.S.C. section 1692k(a)(3). It also stated that docket entry no. 52 was resolved.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.