Opinion
C.A. No.: 97A-03-009-RSG
Submitted: June 7, 1999
Decided: August 17, 1999 Ordered: February 8, 2000
ORDER
Upon review of the Petition for Attorney's Fees submitted in this case, it appears to this Court:
1. Jose P. Alcaraz ("Claimant") petitions this Court for attorney's fees pursuant to 19 Del. C. § 2350(f) in connection with her appeal to this Court from a decision of the Industrial Accident Board ("Board").
2. On February 20, 1998, the Board granted Claimant attorney's fees in the amount of $250.00. Claimant was injured on the job and he subsequently sought treatment for the industrial accident. General Motors Corp., ("Employer") objected to the Board's decision and filed an appeal with this Court on April 7, 1998. Employer argued that pursuant to 19 Del. C. § 2127 and Workers' Compensation Rule 24, Claimant was not entitled to recover because an agreement has been reached between the parties.
3. On July 22, 1998, this Court affirmed the Board's decision to grant the attorney's fees, but reversed and remanded for the determination of the amount of fees consistent with the factors discussed in General Motors Corp. v. Cox. The Board resolved the issue of calculating proper attorney's fees in accordance with the guidelines set forth above and in Cox. The Board further considered other two factors: (1) the Employer's ability to pay; and (2) whether Claimant's attorney has or will receive any fees or expenses from any other source. The Board resolved the matter in favor of Claimant and awarded him attorney's fees. Following the Board's decision on remand, Claimant asks this Court to award him attorney's fees for the appellate work necessitated by Employer's appeal. Claimant, having successfully prevailed on appeal from the Board's decision and having further prevailed on remand, is entitled to an award of attorney's fees and costs pursuant to 19 Del. C. § 2352(f).
Del. Supr., 304 A.2d 55 (1973).
Pollard v. Placers, Inc., Del. Super., C.A. No.: 95A-09-021, Cooch, J (Aug. 9, 1996), aff'd, Del. Supr., 703 A.2d 1211.
4. It is a well-established Delaware law that a moving party must provide an adequate explanation for the amount of attorney's fees sought. Specifically, the requirements of General Motors Corp. v. Cox must be satisfied. Factors to be considered as guides in determining the reasonableness of a fee include the following:
(1) The time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly.
(2) The likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyer.
(3)The fees customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services.
(4) The amount involved and the results obtained.
(5) The time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances.
(6) The nature and length of the professional relationship with the client.
(7) The experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers performing the services.
(8) Whether the fee is fixed or contingent.
Cox, 304 A.2d 55.
5. The parties' attorneys do not dispute the application of the Cox factors. However, the issue of contention is the amount of fees to be awarded subject to the parties interpretations of the proper hourly charge and the time spent in preparing the petition for attorney's fees.
Claimant requests an award of $3,300.00 calculated as follows: $200.00 per hour for attorney time of 13.5 hours for a total of $2,700.00, plus $150.00 per hour for attorney time of 4 hours for the preparation of the petition for attorney's fees. Employer contests the fee of $200.00 per hour and suggests a rate of $150.00 per hour, but Employer does not contest the 13.5 hours spent. Employer also suggests that the petition for attorney's fees itself suggests an hourly rate of $150.00, and not $200.00, because of the dollar amount attached to the time spent for appeal versus the dollar amount attached to the time spent for preparation of the petition. Employer further opposes Claimant's request for an award of four hours of time spent preparing this petition, suggesting that two hours of time is more reasonable.
Employer arrives at the $150.00 per hour figure by stating by affidavit that the primary attorney for Employer billed at a rate of$145.00 per hour, and that two other attorneys for Employer billed $125.00 and $175.00, respectively. Employer also states that the petition itself indicates that the hourly rate is $150.00.
6. The amount of attorney's fees awarded is within the discretion of the Court. Claimant did not provide this Court with any indication of the reason for the discrepancy in hourly rates for appeal time and petition preparation time. Nevertheless, based on Claimant's counsel's experience in the worker's compensation field, this Court finds that $200.00 per hour is a reasonable rate. Such a fee is reasonable in light of the work produced and is consistent with the hourly fees charged by other attorneys in the area with similar experience and credentials.
Pollard, supra n. 2; Digiacomo v. Board of Public Educ. in Wilmington, Del. Supr., 507 A.2d 542, 546 (1986).
Congruently, based on Claimant's attorney's experience in the field and the lack of complexity associated with petitioning this Court for an award of attorney's fees, this Court finds that two hours of preparation time for the petition is appropriate.
7. Based on the foregoing, Claimant is awarded $3000.00 based on the following calculation:
Appellate process (13.5 hour x $200.00) = $2700.00
Preparation of the Petition for attorney's fees (2 hours x $150.00) = $ 300.00
Total Awarded: = $3000.00IT IS SO ORDERED.