×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
$99,981 In Fees Awarded For Successful Massachusetts Court Access Suit
In a strongly worded opinion chastising Massachusetts officials for over 1itigating a case in which a prisoner's constitutional right of access to courts was clearly violated, a federal district court awarded attorneys' fees and costs of $99,981 to the plaintiff. Plaintiff's counsel, a commercial law firm, had volunteered to represent the prisoner, pro bono, at the Court's request.
Daniel LaPlante, a state prisoner in protective custody, sued state officials, pro se, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 alleging they violated his constitutional right of access to courts. According to LaPlante, officials at the state prison in Cedar Junction denied him physical access to the unit law library. Instead, he was provided only with legal materials requested by precise citation.
In the summer of 2001, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts solicited counsel to represent LaPlante. The commercial law firm of Palmer & Dodge volunteered and accepted the case pro bono. The firm immediately filed an amended complaint adding a claim to enforce a previous settlement agreement which covered the exact same issues, LaPlante v. Maloney, 96-11116-RCL (USDC D MA 1998).
On January 30, 2003, the Court granted LaPlante's motion for summary judgment and awarded him nominal damages of $21 and permanently enjoined prison officials from infringing on his right of access to courts and from violating the previous settlement agreement. The Court further held that LaPlante was clearly the prevailing party within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and that his counsel was entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. Counsel then applied for attorneys' fees of $125,085.83. The defendants claimed the amount was grossly excessive" and that the case was over-litigated and overbilled.
In examining the issue, the Court first addressed the duplicity of defendants' argument regarding excessive litigation. State officials raised argument after argument which were the prototypical red herrings,'" the Court held. If the case was over-litigated by any party it was the defendants. The plaintiff had no choice but to respond.
Next, the Court held that staffing the case with four attorneys--a senior associate, a mid-level associate, and a junior associate, all under the supervision of a partner--was not excessive: The firm had no experience with § 1983 or prisoner litigation and reasonably believed that they had to research everyone of the defendants' diversionary tactics." The Court further noted that Palmer & Dodge was the only firm willing to accept the case, which was particularly troubling since LaPlante's claims were meritorious.
The Court also agreed with most of the hourly rates--which reflected rates garnered for counsel in other civil rights cases--submitted by the firm. The hourly rates of $300 for Daryl Lapp, a partner since 1995, and $275 for George Olson, a senior litigation associate since 1994, were justified by their expertise. However, the Court reduced the hourly rate for Marc Goldstein, a mid-level associate since 1997, from $225 to $150, and for John Bennet, a junior litigation associate since 2001, from $175 to $120, holding that the proposed fees were too steep where their experience does not counterbalance their lack of expertise in the field.
Finally, the Court discounted defendants' claim that the time spent on the breach of settlement claim (which under the agreement specified fees pursuant to § 1988) had to be separated from the latter time dealing with § 1983 prison litigation (under which fees are restricted by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, or PLRA). Rather, the Court concluded that they were inseparable. [i]n order to answer the most preliminary question litigation," the Court held, counsel had to understand the agreement, difference between protective custody and population, the Department's
considerable discretion in classifying prisoners, and the constitutional protections that apply no matter how the prisoner is classified.
Based on its analysis, the Court awarded LaPlante $99,981.43 in attorneys' fees and costs. See: LaPlante v. Pepe, 307 F.Supp.2d 219 (USDC D MA 2004).
Daniel LaPlante, a state prisoner in protective custody, sued state officials, pro se, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 alleging they violated his constitutional right of access to courts. According to LaPlante, officials at the state prison in Cedar Junction denied him physical access to the unit law library. Instead, he was provided only with legal materials requested by precise citation.
In the summer of 2001, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts solicited counsel to represent LaPlante. The commercial law firm of Palmer & Dodge volunteered and accepted the case pro bono. The firm immediately filed an amended complaint adding a claim to enforce a previous settlement agreement which covered the exact same issues, LaPlante v. Maloney, 96-11116-RCL (USDC D MA 1998).
On January 30, 2003, the Court granted LaPlante's motion for summary judgment and awarded him nominal damages of $21 and permanently enjoined prison officials from infringing on his right of access to courts and from violating the previous settlement agreement. The Court further held that LaPlante was clearly the prevailing party within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and that his counsel was entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. Counsel then applied for attorneys' fees of $125,085.83. The defendants claimed the amount was grossly excessive" and that the case was over-litigated and overbilled.
In examining the issue, the Court first addressed the duplicity of defendants' argument regarding excessive litigation. State officials raised argument after argument which were the prototypical red herrings,'" the Court held. If the case was over-litigated by any party it was the defendants. The plaintiff had no choice but to respond.
Next, the Court held that staffing the case with four attorneys--a senior associate, a mid-level associate, and a junior associate, all under the supervision of a partner--was not excessive: The firm had no experience with § 1983 or prisoner litigation and reasonably believed that they had to research everyone of the defendants' diversionary tactics." The Court further noted that Palmer & Dodge was the only firm willing to accept the case, which was particularly troubling since LaPlante's claims were meritorious.
The Court also agreed with most of the hourly rates--which reflected rates garnered for counsel in other civil rights cases--submitted by the firm. The hourly rates of $300 for Daryl Lapp, a partner since 1995, and $275 for George Olson, a senior litigation associate since 1994, were justified by their expertise. However, the Court reduced the hourly rate for Marc Goldstein, a mid-level associate since 1997, from $225 to $150, and for John Bennet, a junior litigation associate since 2001, from $175 to $120, holding that the proposed fees were too steep where their experience does not counterbalance their lack of expertise in the field.
Finally, the Court discounted defendants' claim that the time spent on the breach of settlement claim (which under the agreement specified fees pursuant to § 1988) had to be separated from the latter time dealing with § 1983 prison litigation (under which fees are restricted by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, or PLRA). Rather, the Court concluded that they were inseparable. [i]n order to answer the most preliminary question litigation," the Court held, counsel had to understand the agreement, difference between protective custody and population, the Department's
considerable discretion in classifying prisoners, and the constitutional protections that apply no matter how the prisoner is classified.
Based on its analysis, the Court awarded LaPlante $99,981.43 in attorneys' fees and costs. See: LaPlante v. Pepe, 307 F.Supp.2d 219 (USDC D MA 2004).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
LaPlante v. Pepe
| Year | 2004 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 307 F.Supp.2d 219 (USDC D MA 2004). |
| Level | District Court |
| Conclusion | Bench Verdict |
| Attorney Fees | 99981 |
| Damages | 21 |
| Injunction Status | Granted |
IV. CONCLUSION
I hereby AWARD the total sum of Ninety-Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred Eighty-One And 43/100 ($99,981.43) Dollars in costs and attorneys' fees to plaintiff's counsel. (See Appendix "C.")
SO ORDERED.
*227 APPENDIX "A"
The following chart shows fees awarded only for the hours worked from June
14 through August 17, 2001. The Court has reduced by 50% the amount of fees
claimed for this period.
[Note: The following TABLE/FORM is too wide to be displayed on one screen.
You must print it for a meaningful review of its contents. The table has been
divided into multiple pieces with each piece containing information to help you
assemble a printout of the table. The information for each piece includes: (1)
a three line message preceding the tabular data showing by line # and
character # the position of the upper left-hand corner of the piece and the
position of the piece within the entire table; and (2) a numeric scale
following the tabular data displaying the character positions.]
*******************************************************************************
******** This is piece 1. -- It begins at character 1 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURS WORKED
FROM
6/14/2001 MARC GEORGE DARYL J.
TO 8/17/2001 GOLDSTEIN OLSON LAPP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hours 28.3 51.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hourly $ 150.00 $ 275.00 $300.00
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees $4,245.00 $14,217.50
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees $18,462.50
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core 1.6 7.5 3.8
Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 75.00 $ 183.33 $200.00
Hourly
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 120.00 $ 1,374.98 $760.00
Fees
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 2,254.98
Fees
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees $4,365.00 $33,458.30 $760.00
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL
ATTORNEYS
FEES FOR
ABOVE
PERIOD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1...+...10....+...20....+...30....+...40....+...50....+...60....+...70
*******************************************************************************
******* This is piece 2. -- It begins at character 71 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
---------------------
TOTAL WITH
50%
REDUCTION
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$ 9,231.25
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$ 1,127.49
---------------------
---------------------
$10,358.74
---------------------
71..+...80....+...90.
APPENDIX "B"
The following chart shows fees awarded only for the hours worked from
August 18, 2001, to February 14, 2003.
[Note: The following TABLE/FORM is too wide to be displayed on one screen.
You must print it for a meaningful review of its contents. The table has been
divided into multiple pieces with each piece containing information to help you
assemble a printout of the table. The information for each piece includes: (1)
a three line message preceding the tabular data showing by line # and
character # the position of the upper left-hand corner of the piece and the
position of the piece within the entire table; and (2) a numeric scale
following the tabular data displaying the character positions.]
*******************************************************************************
******** This is piece 1. -- It begins at character 1 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURS WORKED
FROM
8/18/2001 TO MARC GEORGE DARYL J. JOHN
2/14/2003 GOLDSTEIN OLSON LAPP BENNETT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hours 130.2 205.1 7.8 56.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hourly $ 150.00 $ 275.00 $ 300.00 $ 120.00
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees $19,530.00 $56,402.50 $2,340.00 $6,804.00
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core 12.5 13.0 3.5 1.3
Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 75.00 $ 183.33 $ 200.00 $ 60.00
Hourly
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 937.50 $ 2,383.29 $ 700.00 $ 78.00
Fees
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core
Fees
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees $20,467.50 $58,785.79 $3,040.00 $6,882.00
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL
ATTORNEYS
FEES FOR
ABOVE
PERIOD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1...+...10....+...20....+...30....+...40....+...50....+...60....+...70
*******************************************************************************
******* This is piece 2. -- It begins at character 71 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
---------------------
TOTAL
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$85,076.50
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$ 4,098.79
---------------------
---------------------
$89,175.29
---------------------
71..+...80....+...90.
APPENDIX "C"
The following chart shows the fees awarded from Appendix A (June 14, 2001,
to August 17, 2001), the fees awarded from Appendix B (August 18, 2001, to
February 14, 2003), the amount of attorneys' fees requested, and the amount
of attorneys' fees being awarded by the Court.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL FEES $125,533.23
REQUESTED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees from $ 9,231.25
6/14/2001 to
8/17/2001
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core Fees from $ 1,127.49
6/14/2001 to
8/17/2001
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees from $10,358.74
6/14/2001 to
8/17/2001
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees from $85,076.50
8/18/2001 to
2/14/2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core Fees from $ 4,098.79
8/18/2001 to
2/14/2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees from $89,175.29
8/18/2001 to
2/14/2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL FEES FROM $ 99,534.03
6/14/2001 TO
2/14/2003--GRAND
TOTAL OF FEES
AWARDED BY THE
COURT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN $ 25,999.20
FEES REQUESTED
AND ACTUAL FEES
AWARDED (AMOUNT
OF REDUCTION)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
307 F.Supp.2d 219
END OF DOCUMENT
I hereby AWARD the total sum of Ninety-Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred Eighty-One And 43/100 ($99,981.43) Dollars in costs and attorneys' fees to plaintiff's counsel. (See Appendix "C.")
SO ORDERED.
*227 APPENDIX "A"
The following chart shows fees awarded only for the hours worked from June
14 through August 17, 2001. The Court has reduced by 50% the amount of fees
claimed for this period.
[Note: The following TABLE/FORM is too wide to be displayed on one screen.
You must print it for a meaningful review of its contents. The table has been
divided into multiple pieces with each piece containing information to help you
assemble a printout of the table. The information for each piece includes: (1)
a three line message preceding the tabular data showing by line # and
character # the position of the upper left-hand corner of the piece and the
position of the piece within the entire table; and (2) a numeric scale
following the tabular data displaying the character positions.]
*******************************************************************************
******** This is piece 1. -- It begins at character 1 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURS WORKED
FROM
6/14/2001 MARC GEORGE DARYL J.
TO 8/17/2001 GOLDSTEIN OLSON LAPP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hours 28.3 51.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hourly $ 150.00 $ 275.00 $300.00
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees $4,245.00 $14,217.50
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees $18,462.50
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core 1.6 7.5 3.8
Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 75.00 $ 183.33 $200.00
Hourly
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 120.00 $ 1,374.98 $760.00
Fees
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 2,254.98
Fees
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees $4,365.00 $33,458.30 $760.00
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL
ATTORNEYS
FEES FOR
ABOVE
PERIOD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1...+...10....+...20....+...30....+...40....+...50....+...60....+...70
*******************************************************************************
******* This is piece 2. -- It begins at character 71 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
---------------------
TOTAL WITH
50%
REDUCTION
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$ 9,231.25
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$ 1,127.49
---------------------
---------------------
$10,358.74
---------------------
71..+...80....+...90.
APPENDIX "B"
The following chart shows fees awarded only for the hours worked from
August 18, 2001, to February 14, 2003.
[Note: The following TABLE/FORM is too wide to be displayed on one screen.
You must print it for a meaningful review of its contents. The table has been
divided into multiple pieces with each piece containing information to help you
assemble a printout of the table. The information for each piece includes: (1)
a three line message preceding the tabular data showing by line # and
character # the position of the upper left-hand corner of the piece and the
position of the piece within the entire table; and (2) a numeric scale
following the tabular data displaying the character positions.]
*******************************************************************************
******** This is piece 1. -- It begins at character 1 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURS WORKED
FROM
8/18/2001 TO MARC GEORGE DARYL J. JOHN
2/14/2003 GOLDSTEIN OLSON LAPP BENNETT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hours 130.2 205.1 7.8 56.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Hourly $ 150.00 $ 275.00 $ 300.00 $ 120.00
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees $19,530.00 $56,402.50 $2,340.00 $6,804.00
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core 12.5 13.0 3.5 1.3
Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 75.00 $ 183.33 $ 200.00 $ 60.00
Hourly
Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core $ 937.50 $ 2,383.29 $ 700.00 $ 78.00
Fees
Subtotal
Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core
Fees
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees $20,467.50 $58,785.79 $3,040.00 $6,882.00
Subtotal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL
ATTORNEYS
FEES FOR
ABOVE
PERIOD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1...+...10....+...20....+...30....+...40....+...50....+...60....+...70
*******************************************************************************
******* This is piece 2. -- It begins at character 71 of table line 1. ********
*******************************************************************************
---------------------
TOTAL
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$85,076.50
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
$ 4,098.79
---------------------
---------------------
$89,175.29
---------------------
71..+...80....+...90.
APPENDIX "C"
The following chart shows the fees awarded from Appendix A (June 14, 2001,
to August 17, 2001), the fees awarded from Appendix B (August 18, 2001, to
February 14, 2003), the amount of attorneys' fees requested, and the amount
of attorneys' fees being awarded by the Court.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL FEES $125,533.23
REQUESTED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees from $ 9,231.25
6/14/2001 to
8/17/2001
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core Fees from $ 1,127.49
6/14/2001 to
8/17/2001
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees from $10,358.74
6/14/2001 to
8/17/2001
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Fees from $85,076.50
8/18/2001 to
2/14/2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Core Fees from $ 4,098.79
8/18/2001 to
2/14/2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fees from $89,175.29
8/18/2001 to
2/14/2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL FEES FROM $ 99,534.03
6/14/2001 TO
2/14/2003--GRAND
TOTAL OF FEES
AWARDED BY THE
COURT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN $ 25,999.20
FEES REQUESTED
AND ACTUAL FEES
AWARDED (AMOUNT
OF REDUCTION)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
307 F.Supp.2d 219
END OF DOCUMENT