Magalios v. Peralta

Background

Nicholas Magalios brought this civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that corrections officers Mathew Peralta and Timothy Bailey beat him without provocation while he was a prisoner at Fishkill Correctional Facility. He also alleged that Peralta, Bailey, and Edward Blount watched the assault and deliberately failed to intervene. Magalios alleged that the conduct violated the Eighth Amendment and caused serious injuries, including a shoulder injury requiring surgery. The defendants denied using force against him.

A jury found the defendants jointly and severally liable for $50,000 in compensatory damages. It also awarded punitive damages of $350,000 against Peralta, $350,000 against Bailey, and $250,000 against Blount. The court reduced those punitive awards to $200,000 each for Peralta and Bailey and $100,000 for Blount. The defendants appealed, and Magalios cross-appealed the reduction of punitive damages. The Second Circuit affirmed the court’s rulings.

Fee Standard

Because Magalios prevailed in an action under § 1983, the court could award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b). 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 also considered the results achieved, the difficulty of the case, counsel’s experience, and whether the billing records included unnecessary or clerical work.

Hourly Rates

Magalios requested hourly rates of $800 for Edward Sivin and Glenn Miller, $400 for Clyde Rastetter, $200 for Jack Ethé, and $175 for Katie Sinise. The defendants argued that these rates were excessive and proposed lower rates.

The court awarded $650 per hour for Sivin and Miller. It found that their experience, the evidentiary challenges, the difficulty of the trial, the risks of the case, and Magalios’s success justified rates above the typical historical range in the district, although $700 was not warranted. The court awarded Rastetter $300 per hour because he had only a few years of practice when he worked on the case. It awarded Ethé $150 per hour based on his experience and the nature of some of his work, and Sinise $100 per hour because she had less experience.

Reductions to Hours and Fees

The court generally found the billing records sufficiently clear and determined that most block-billed entries could be meaningfully reviewed. It nevertheless reduced compensation for clerical tasks performed by attorneys and for a portion of a block-billed entry involving clerical work. The court reduced the award by $2,940 for Sivin, $1,050 for Miller, and $350 for Rastetter for this work.

The court also found that 53.98 hours spent preparing and defending the fee application were excessive and reduced that time to 35 hours. This reduced the award by $6,538.61 for Sivin and $1,338.09 for Ethé.

The court further excluded $6,839.16 for 22.7972 hours Rastetter spent preparing the reply brief on Magalios’s unsuccessful cross-appeal. The court found that the cross-appeal was not unreasonable as a litigation strategy, but concluded that counsel should not be compensated for work devoted specifically to that unsuccessful effort. The court did not exclude most of the work on the main appellate brief because that work would have been performed in defending against the defendants’ appeal even without the cross-appeal.

Costs and Disposition

Magalios requested $6,764.85 in litigation costs and provided supporting documentation. The defendants did not object to reimbursement of those costs, so the court awarded the full amount.

The court calculated a total lodestar of $398,248 and, after the reductions, awarded $379,192.14 in attorney’s fees. The court also awarded $6,764.85 in costs, for a total fee-and-cost award of $385,956.99. Judge Seibel granted Magalios’s motion to the extent of those amounts and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending motion.