Opinion
Civil Action No. AW-98-2111
June 26, 2001
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arose from the assault of Plaintiff, Wilbur Sutton, by three correctional officers while he was an inmate at the Maryland House of Correction Annex. On April 12, 2001, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of Plaintiff against three of the five defendants and awarded him $19,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Payment of Attorney's Fees and Costs as authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1988. No hearing is deemed necessary. See Local Rule 105.6. Upon consideration of the arguments made in support of, and opposition to, the Plaintiff's motion, the Court shall grant Plaintiff's request for attorneys' fees subject to the limitations imposed by the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, and the Local Rules of the District Court of Maryland.
DISCUSSION
There is no dispute that Plaintiff was the prevailing party in his § 1983 action and entitled to an award of attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988. A court's award of reasonable attorneys' fees is the product of the reasonable hours expended multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate. In assessing the reasonableness of the hours and rate claimed, the court considers the following twelve Lodestar factors elucidated in Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 488 F.2d 714 (1974) and adopted by the Fourth Circuit in Barber v. Kimbrell's, Inc., 577 F.2d 216, 226 n. 28 (4th Cir. 1978): "(1) the time and labor expended; (2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions raised; (3) the skill required to properly perform the legal services rendered; (4) the attorney's opportunity costs in pressing the instant litigation; (5) the customary fee for like work; (6) the attorney's expectations at the outset of the litigation; (7) the time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; (8) the amount in controversy and the results obtained; (9) the experience, reputation and ability of the attorney; (10) the undesirability of the case within the legal community in which the suit arose; (11) the nature and length of the professional relationship between attorney and client; and (12) attorneys' fees awards in similar cases." EEOC v. Service News Co., 898 F.2d 958, 965 (4th Cir. 1990) (quoting Barber, 577 F.2d at 226 n. 28). See also Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 (1984); Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983); Criswell v. Western Airlines, Inc., 709 F.2d 544 (9th Cir. 1983) (applying standard to ADEA case). "[T]hese factors should be considered in determining the reasonable rate and the reasonable hours, which are then multiplied to determine the lodestar figure which will normally reflect a reasonable fee." Service News. Co., 898 F.2d at 965.
Because the Plaintiff was a prisoner confined to a correctional facility throughout the litigation of this case, the award of fees in this action is also governed by § 803(d) of the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act. The PLRA allows for the award of attorneys' fees where "(A) the fee was directly and reasonably incurred in proving an actual violation of the plaintiff's rights protected by a statute pursuant to which a fee may be awarded under section 1988; and (B)(i) the amount of the fee is proportionately related to the court ordered relief for the violation; or (ii) the fee was directly and reasonably incurred in enforcing the relief ordered for the violation." 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(d).
As to the available hourly rate, the PLRA also provides that, in cases brought by prisoners, "[n]o award of attorney's fees . . . shall be based on an hourly rate greater than 150 percent of the hourly rate established . . . for payment of court-appointed counsel." 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(d)(3). In the District Court of Maryland, the current hourly rate for court-appointed counsel is $55.00 per hour for work performed out of court and $75.00 per hour for work performed in court. Given Mr. Mercer's high level of skill and expertise, the Court believes he is entitled to the maximum allowable rate.
After a review of the appropriate Lodestar factors, the Court finds that Plaintiff's counsel expended a reasonable number of hours given the skill of counsel, the nature of the questions raised, and the excellent results obtained compared to the low success rate of prisoner suits. Furthermore, the Court finds that the requested fee was directly and reasonably incurred in proving the violation of Plaintiff's constitutional rights and proportionately related to the court ordered relief. Given consideration of the appropriate Lodestar factors and the PLRA, the Court shall grant Plaintiff's petition for attorneys' fees as follows:
Hours Expended Applicable Rate Total
In-Court 22.0 $112.50 per hour $2,475.00
Out of Court 127.8 $53.50 per hour $6,794.50
Total $9,269.50
The Court also finds that Plaintiff is entitled to travel costs incurred by his attorney over the course of the representation. Although Plaintiff seeks $3.25 per mile for travel related to this action, under the Local Rules, mileage is compensable at 0.31 per mile. See Local Rules of the United States Dist. Ct. of the Dist. of Maryland app. B at 78. Additionally, on July 12, 1999 and April 13, 2001, Plaintiff's counsel estimates that the miles from Greenbelt, Maryland to the Maryland House of Correction Annex located in Jessup, Maryland at 60 to 80 miles round trip. The Court believes that the more appropriate distance is 32 miles round trip. The Court also notes that the claimed mileage for travel on April 12, 2001 from Plaintiff's counsel's office at Greenway Center Drive in Greenbelt, Maryland to the Courthouse also located in Greenbelt, Maryland appears excessive. The Court believes that 6.2 miles more accurately reflects the round trip distance between the two locales. After applying the appropriate adjustments to Plaintiff's request, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to travel costs of 450.2 miles at $0.31 per mile giving rise to a total of $139.57. The Court also finds that Plaintiff is entitled to reimbursement for postage costs of $12.00. In total, the Court awards Plaintiff $151.57 in costs incurred in pursuing this action.
The total award of $9,421.07 is the product of the reasonable hours expended applied to the hourly rates set by the PLRA and takes into account reductions for the apparent inconsistencies in the billing of mileage. Lastly, section 1997e(d)(2) of the PLRA provides that "[w]henever a monetary judgment is awarded [to a prisoner in a civil rights action], a portion of the judgment (not to exceed 25 percent) shall be applied to satisfy the amount of attorney's fees awarded against the defendant." 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(d)(2). Given the egregious of the conduct at issue, the Court directs that $1.00 of the Plaintiff's judgment be applied toward satisfying the award of attorneys' fees and costs. See Morrison v. Davis, 88 F. Supp.2d 799, 811 (S.D.Ohio 2000).
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, the Court will grant Plaintiff's Motion Motion for Payment of Attorney's Fees and Costs. Consistent with the dictates of the PLRA and the Local Rules, the Court awards Plaintiff $9,420.07 in attorneys' fees and costs. An Order consistent with this Opinion will follow.
ORDER
For the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion dated July ___, 2001, IT IS this day of July, 2001 by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, hereby
ORDERED:
1. That Plaintiff's Motion for Payment of Attorney's Fees [44-1] and Costs [44-2] BE, and the same hereby IS, GRANTED;
2. That attorneys' fees and costs are awarded in favor of Plaintiff against Defendants in the amount of $9,421.07 and
3. That the Clerk of the Court mail copies of this order to all counsel of record.