E.W. v. New York City Department of Education
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:21-cv-11208
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
In E.W. v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Caproni awarded $37,661.08 in IDEA-related fees, costs, and expenses and closed the case.
E.W. and the Cuddy Law Firm received an award of $37,661.08 in attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs; the New York City Department of Education was required to pay that award, and the case was closed.
What happened
E.W. sued the New York City Department of Education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and later sought $93,993.35 in attorneys’ fees and costs after rejecting the Department’s $38,000.01 settlement offer. The request concerned work performed by the Cuddy Law Firm.
A magistrate judge recommended awarding $37,286.08. E.W. objected to that recommendation, including the denial of payment for her lawyer’s travel time, the hourly rates, and reductions to the requested hours. The Department responded that the recommended rates were too high.
Judge Valerie Caproni adopted the recommendation in part and modified it in part. She added $375 for two hours of travel time at half the approved hourly rate, bringing the award to $37,661.08 in attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs, and directed the Clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- E.W. v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:21-cv-11208
- Valerie Caproni
- July 31, 2023
Background
E.W., individually and on behalf of A.G., a child with a disability, sued the New York City Department of Education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. After withdrawing several claims, E.W. moved for summary judgment on her request for attorneys’ fees, seeking $93,993.35 for fees and costs incurred by the Cuddy Law Firm.
The Department had made a written settlement offer of $38,000.01 in full satisfaction of claims for attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses. E.W. rejected the offer. The court referred the dispositive motions to Magistrate Judge Gorenstein, who issued a report and recommendation recommending an award of $37,286.08 in attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs, plus post-judgment interest at the statutory rate.
Review of the Recommendation
E.W. objected to the recommendation. The objections challenged the denial of fees for attorney Michael Cuddy’s travel time, the hourly rates, the finding that the Department had not unreasonably prolonged the proceedings, the conclusion that rejecting the settlement offer was unjustified, the treatment of work involving two school years, and a 35% reduction in hours attributed to the federal action. The Department did not file a formal objection but argued that the recommended hourly rates overstated the effect of inflation.
The court reviewed the properly challenged portions of the recommendation without deference and reviewed the other issues for clear error. The court relied in part on a recent Second Circuit decision holding that a court may adjust travel costs but may not eliminate all fees for travel by an attorney located outside New York City. Applying that ruling, the court concluded that Michael Cuddy should receive two hours of travel-time fees at 50% of his approved hourly rate. Because his approved rate was $375 per hour, the additional award was $375.
The court rejected E.W.’s other objections. It found no clear error in the conclusion that E.W. had not supported the claim that the Department unreasonably prolonged the proceedings. It also upheld the hourly rates of $375 for Andrew and Michael Cuddy and $180 for Benjamin Kopp. The court found no clear error in the determination that rejecting the settlement offer because it waived post-settlement interest was unjustified. It further upheld the treatment of the work for the two school years and the 35% across-the-board reduction in hours spent on the federal action.
Disposition
The court adopted the report and recommendation in part and modified it in part. It awarded E.W. $37,661.08 in attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the open fee motion and close the case.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.