M. R. v. New York City Department of Education
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:21-cv-05503
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In M.R. v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Caproni granted reconsideration and reduced travel-time fees under a revised Second Circuit ruling.
The ruling changed the attorney’s-fee award payable to M.R. and affected the New York City Department of Education’s financial obligation under the judgment.
What happened
M.R. had previously received an award of attorney’s fees and costs, including payment for travel to three in-person hearings. After the Second Circuit issued a correction in a related case, the court reconsidered how that travel time should be paid.
The Department of Education asked the court to reduce the travel-time payment to half the approved hourly rate. M.R. opposed the request, arguing that the correction did not change binding law and should apply only to the related case.
Judge Caproni granted the motion for reconsideration. She entered a Third Amended Judgment awarding M.R. $25,080.37 in fees and $760.57 in costs, and closed the case.
The detailed version
- M. R. v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:21-cv-05503
- Valerie Caproni
- July 26, 2023
Background
The court had previously awarded M.R., individually and on behalf of J.R., a child with a disability, $23,977.87 in attorney’s fees and $760.57 in costs. The earlier award did not include payment for travel time between Auburn, New York, and New York, New York, for three in-person hearings. M.R. appealed.
The Second Circuit later remanded the case for further proceedings after deciding a related appeal involving the same defendant. In that decision, the Second Circuit initially stated that the Cuddy Law Firm should receive one hour of travel time at the approved hourly rate for each direction of travel. Based on that ruling, this court entered a Second Amended Judgment awarding $26,182.87 in fees and $760.57 in costs.
The Second Circuit then issued an errata order correcting its decision. The corrected language stated that the travel-time fees should be calculated at half the hourly rate otherwise used by the district court. The Department of Education moved for reconsideration based on that correction. M.R. opposed the motion, arguing that the errata order was not a change in binding law and should be limited to the related case.
Ruling
A motion for reconsideration asks the court to revisit an earlier ruling. The court held that reconsideration was appropriate because the Second Circuit’s errata order was an intervening change in controlling law. The court also stated that the Second Circuit had instructed it to conduct further proceedings consistent with the related decision and that neither the decision nor the errata order appeared limited to that case’s facts.
The court granted the motion for reconsideration. It awarded fees for one hour of travel time each way for the three in-person merit hearings, calculated at half of the previously approved hourly rate of $367.50 for Nina Aasen. The travel-time fees totaled $1,102.50.
The Clerk was directed to enter a Third Amended Judgment awarding M.R. $25,080.37 in fees and $760.57 in costs, terminate the open motion at Docket 71, and close the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.