Opinion
Civil Action No. 3-4211-H.
May 17, 2000.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Once again — it is becoming habitual — the Court has the task of deciding a fee application submitted by Intervenor Black Coalition to Maximize Education ("Intervenor") and questioned by Defendants.
Before the Court are the Applications of Intervenor for Attorney's Fees and Expenses for the First Quarter, 2000, filed April 3, 2000, and Defendants' Response thereto, filed April 27, 2000.
Intervenor seeks attorney's fees in the amount of $25,000 (100 hours at $250 per hour) and out-of-pocket expenses in the amount of $686.53, for a total of $25,686.53. Defendants allege, in substance, that the hours spent by Intervenor are excessive. The hourly rate ($250 per hour) is not contested.
After reviewing the pleadings and exhibits, together with the relevant statutory and case law, and relying on its knowledge of the issues in this case at this stage of this litigation, the Court is of the opinion that the time spent by Intervenor counsel during the First Quarter, 2000, was in excess of what was reasonable and necessary.
Analysis
In determining the number of hours for which Intervenor's counsel is entitled to reimbursement, the Court has relied on the following:
• The Court's knowledge of issues in the case, based on presiding over the case since 1981.
• The Court's experience in setting attorney's fees in this case and numerous other civil rights cases.
• Case authority relevant to setting attorney's fees and, particularly, authority relating to the responsibility of the Court to review requested attorney's fees and to make reductions when the requested amount of fees appears to be excessive. See e.g., Johnson v. Georgia Highway, 488 F.2d 714, 712-719 (5th Cir. 1974); Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433, 103 S.Ct. 1933, 1939 (1983); Von Clark v. Butler, 916 F.2d 255, 259 (5th Cir. 1990); Alberti v. Klevenhagen, 896 F.2d 927, 933-34 (5th Cir.), vacated on other grounds. 903 F.2d 352 (5th Cir. 1990); Louisiana Power Light v. Kellstrom, 50 F.3d 319, 325-326 (5th Cir. 1995).
• The ability and skill of Intervenor's counsel as reflected in his $250 per hour rate, agreed to several years ago by the Defendants. Because of his long involvement in this case and his familiarity with the issues, Intervener's attorney should have performed the tasks itemized in his two motions in much less time.
• Plaintiffs' counsel competently and vigorously represents the African American and other minority (notably, Latino) children in this case.
• During the First Quarter, 2000, there were no court proceedings in this case.
Excessive Time/First Quarter
The Court is of the opinion that the amount of time spent by Intervenor's counsel on the Crozier Tech and Edison matters is excessive. Neither matter was complex or demanding.Intervenor's counsel spent between 36 and 43.25 hours on the Edison matter, as itemized in his Application. Yet, as Defendants note, Response at 3, Intervener instructed its counsel not to attend the briefing session with the Edison representatives and not to interrogate the Edison representatives. In the Court's opinion the compensable time for the Edison matter should be reduced by 21 hours .
With respect to the Crozier Tech matter, Intervenor's attorney seeks compensation for between 19 and 21 hours. The Court is unable to discern any basis for spending this much time on that matter. Accordingly, the Crozier Tech time will be reduced by 10 hours .
Accordingly, the total reduction in compensable time is 31 hours and the amount of compensation will be reduced by $7750 (21 hours x $250 per hour). Thus, the Court will allow reasonable and necessary attorney's fees to Intervener's counsel in the amount of $17,250 for the First Quarter, 2000 ($25,000 requested less $7,750 reduced).
The Court allows in full the $686.53 sought for out-of-pocket expenses, finding that such amount is reasonable and necessary.
Defendants are directed to pay to Intervener's counsel the sum of $17,936.53 within 30 days of the date of this Order.
The Court notes Defendants' request that Intervener's counsel not be allowed to charge Defendants for time spent communicating with representatives of organizations which are members of Intervener. Response at 3. Such organizations are named in Exhibit A to Defendants' Response. Defendants' concern is justified but the Court is not willing at this time to establish the bright line ruling requested by Defendants.
SO ORDERED.