Luca v. County of Nassau, 698 F.Supp.2d 296, 302 (E.D.N.Y. 2010) (awarding experienced civil rights counsel hourly rate of $400 in fee award litigated in 2010 and noting that “the current hourly rate cannot logically be frozen in time”); see also Almond v. P.J. Far Rockaway, Inc., No. 15-cv-6792, 2018 WL 922184, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 15, 2018) (“[A]ttorney's fees, like other goods and services, increase in cost with inflation.”); compare Carter, 2019 WL 1499190, at *3 with Lilly v. City of New York, No. 16 Civ. 322, 2017 WL 3493249, at *10 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017) (awarding attorney $450 hourly fee in 2017, and awarding same attorney $500 hourly fee in 2019).
Therefore, the district court awarded Rothman an hourly rate of $450, at the top of the range.Lilly v. City of New York, No. 16 Civ. 322 (ER), 2017 WL 3493249, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017).Id. at *3–5.
In support of this argument, Solda submitted a declaration indicating that he graduated from law school in 1988 (Solda Decl., Dkt. 110-1 ¶ 2 n.1); he has represented collateral loan brokers (i.e., pawn shops) since 2005 (id. ¶ 2); he has worked on “several §[ ]1983 cases” in the early 2000s (id. ¶ 2 n.2); and he has developed a “niche within the pawnbroker trade by representing those businesses in Fourth Amendment § 1983 claims in connection with their challenges with law enforcement” (id. ¶ 3 & n.3 (citing four cases).). In further support of its argument that Solda's hourly rates are reasonable, Plaintiff points to Lilly v. City of New York for the proposition that “a reasonable hourly rate for a civil rights attorney [in the New York area] can range from $250 to $650.” No. 16-CV-322, 2017 WL 3493249, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017), overruled on other grounds, 934 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2019); (see also Pl.'s Br., Dkt. 110-5 at 10.).
See Lilly v. City of New York, No. 16-CV-00322 (ER), 2017 WL 3493249, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017) (discussing attorney's experience), aff'd in relevant part, 934 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2019).
, given the “duration and simplicity of this case,” this Court respectfully recommends that the requested hourly rates be reduced. Lilly v. City of New York, No. 16 Civ. 322, 2007 WL 3493249, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017) (reducing attorney's hourly rate from $600 to $450). Recent cases in this district have determined reasonable hourly rates in FDCPA cases to be $300.00 to $370.00 per hour for partners, see Razilova v. Halsted Fin. Servs. LLC, No. 18-CV-1668, 2019 WL 1370695, at *7 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 1, 2019) (recommending that Mr. Sanders be awarded $350.00 per hour), adopted by, 2019 WL 1364399 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2019); see also Datiz v. Int'l Recovery Assoc., Inc., No. CV 15-3549, 2020 WL 5899881, at *8 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 12, 2020) (recommending that Mr. Sanders be awarded $370.00 per hour), adopted as modified by, 2020 WL 3790348 (E.D.N.Y. July 7, 2020), and $100.00 to $200.00 per hour for junior associates.
A district court opinion of Judge Ramos thoroughly reviewed the hourly rates in this district for attorneys who successfully prosecute civil rights claims, observing that they ranged from $250 to $650, varying with the size and complexity of the case. Lilly v. City of New York, 2017 WL 3493249, at *4-5 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017). Recognizing that some time has passed since the opinion of Judge Ramos, the Court is nevertheless persuaded by his detailed review of hourly rates in civil rights cases and uses it as a reference point.
A district court opinion of Judge Ramos thoroughly reviewed the hourly rates in this district for attorneys who successfully prosecute civil rights claims, observing that they ranged from $250 to $650, varying with the size and complexity of the case. Lilly v. City of New York, 2017 WL 3493249, at *4-5 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017). Recognizing that some time has passed since the opinion of Judge Ramos, the Court is nevertheless persuaded by his detailed review of hourly rates in civil rights cases and uses it as a reference point.
"In determining the reasonable hourly rate, 'courts must look to the market rates prevailing in the community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience, and reputation.'" Lilly v. City of New York, No. 16-CV-322 (ER), 2017 WL 3493249, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017) (quoting Ognibene v. Parkes, No. 08-CV-1335 (LTS), 2014 WL 3610947, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 22, 2014)). A court cannot determine a reasonably hourly rate where, as here, it lacks any information about an attorney's experience.
This adjustment brings the number of hours sought here closer to awards that have been granted by other courts in similar cases. See, e.g., Fabre v. Highbury Concrete Inc., 2018 WL 2389719, at *1, 4 (E.D.N.Y. May 24, 2018) (78 hours reasonable in FLSA action where Rule 68 offer was accepted six months after filing of complaint, and after motion for collective action certification was made); Lilly v. City of N.Y., 2017 WL 3493249, at *1, 7 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017) (awarding 50.3 hours of reasonable attorneys' fees in civil rights action where Rule 68 offer was accepted nine months after filing of complaint, there was limited discovery, and an unsuccessful mediation occurred), rev'd in part on other grounds, 934 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2019). 3.
In several recent cases that resemble this one—which involved relatively light discovery, no expert testimony, no pretrial dispositive motions practice, and five days of trial," see DiFiore Decl. ¶ 4, ECF No. 165—courts in this district have held that for trial attorneys with experience comparable to Sivin and Miller a reasonable hourly rate is $450. See Lilly v. City of New York, No. 16 Civ. 322, 2017 WL 3493249, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017) ("Taking into account [trial counsel's] extensive experience and qualifications, as well as the relatively straightforward nature of the case at hand and the determinations made in the recent comparable cases discussed above, the Court finds that an hourly rate of $450 is appropriate."), rev'd on other grounds, 934 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2019); Balu v. City of New York, No. 12 Civ. 1071, 2016 WL 884666, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2016) (setting $450 hourly rate for experienced trial counsel in employment discrimination case with a four-day trial); Dancy, 141 F. Supp. 3d at 238-39 (holding that "[i]t is reasonable to award . . . an hourly rate of $450 per hour" to counsel with 36 years of civil rights experience, "account[ing] for the relatively uncomplicated nature of this matter"). The Court concludes that $450 per hour is a reasonable rate for Sivin and Miller, balancing their extensive experience and senior position with the relatively straightforward course of this litigation.