Rosario v. City of New York

Background

Richard Rosario brought a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of New York and several New York City Police Department officers. He sought damages for his wrongful conviction and incarceration. After more than four years of litigation, a jury found that the defendants had violated Rosario’s constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial by fabricating evidence, withholding favorable evidence, and/or using a suggestive identification procedure. The jury also found that the City and former Detective Gary Whitaker had maliciously prosecuted Rosario and awarded him $5 million.

As the prevailing party, Rosario moved for attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988. He requested $3,833,900 for the merits phase, $6,570 for travel, $115,240 for preparing the fee motion, and $283,800.99 in expenses. Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron recommended awarding $2,529,945.25 in fees and $213,011.75 in expenses. The recommendation used lower hourly rates, reduced merits-phase hours by 20 percent, reduced travel time, and removed certain expenses. It recommended awarding the full amount requested for work on the fee motion.

Rosario objected to the recommended reductions in hourly rates and merits-phase hours. He did not object to the recommended reductions in travel time or expenses, and the defendants did not object to the report. The court accepted the defendants’ late response to Rosario’s objections.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that Rosario’s requested hourly rates were reasonable. It considered the case’s length, multiple trial preparations, ten-day jury trial, difficult legal and factual issues, extensive discovery and evidentiary disputes, vigorous opposition, and counsel’s experience. The court declined to adopt the report’s recommended reductions in hourly rates.

The court also rejected an across-the-board reduction based on Rosario’s degree of success. Although the jury awarded less than the nearly $50 million that Rosario’s counsel had requested in closing argument, the court held that a $5 million award for twenty years of wrongful incarceration was not limited success. The claims shared a common core of facts and related legal theories, so work on unsuccessful claims and claims against defendants who were not held liable could still be included in the fee calculation. The court also noted that attorneys’ fees under Section 1988 do not have to be proportional to the damages award.

The court nevertheless found that some billing entries were vague or suggested duplicated work. It replaced the recommended 20 percent reduction with reductions of 2.5 percent for partner hours, 5 percent for associate hours, and 10 percent for paralegal and law-clerk hours. The court found no error in the remaining unchallenged portions of the report.

Disposition

The court sustained Rosario’s objections in part and overruled them in part. It adopted the report as modified and awarded Rosario $3,677,086.50 in attorneys’ fees for the merits phase and $115,240 for preparing the fee petition. Including $3,206.25 in travel fees, the total fee award was $3,795,532.75, plus $213,011.75 in expenses. Judge Lorna G. Schofield directed the Clerk of Court to close the fee motion.