Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Ye Hong v. 7 Express Rest. Corp.

17-cv-2174 (KAM)(JO) (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2019)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Ye Hong v. 7 Express Rest. Corp.

2 Citing cases

  1. Xin Hao Liu v. Millenium Motors Sports, LLC

    17-CV-6438 (RPK) (RER) (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 6, 2021)   Cited 3 times
    Rejecting objections to report and recommendation where plaintiffs asked for reconsideration of fees after not having submitted biographical information because they offered no “compelling justification-or any justification at all-for their failure to submit biographical information for these attorneys with their original motion” and “counsel had every reason to understand that this information would be required to sustain their fee request, because judges in this district have previously slashed fee awards involving the Hang law firm, on account of recurring deficiencies such as missing background information on each individual who worked on the case”

    I therefore reject plaintiffs' objections to Judge Reyes' recommendation in this case and adopt the R. & R. in full. My decision aligns with those of several other courts that have declined to revise magistrate judges' calculations of attorneys' fees based on biographical information that was first supplied in an objection to the R. & R. See, e.g., Jianhui Hu v. 226 Wild Ginger, No. 17-CV-10161, 2020 WL 4383501, *4 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 2020); Ye Hong v. 7 Express Rest. Corp., No. 17-CV-2174, 2019 WL 1429584, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2019); Setty v. Synergy Fitness, No. 17-CV-6504, 2019 WL 1292431, at *6 n.6 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 21, 2019); Coley v. City of New York, No. 15-CV-5132, 2017 WL 1162177, at *2-3 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 28, 2017); Mister Softee, Inc. v. Konstantakakos, No. 15-CV-4770, 2016 WL 4250314, at *1-2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2016). CONCLUSION

  2. Singh v. A & A Mkt. Plaza, Inc.

    CV 15-7396 (AKT) (E.D.N.Y. Sep. 30, 2019)   Cited 15 times
    Reducing rate of $450/hour requested by Troy to $375/hour

    The billing rates requested for all three timekeepers in this case exceed the rates generally awarded in this District. Based on the respective experience of each attorney and the particular circumstances of the instant action -- and consistent with other decisions in this District dealing with hourly rates for this same law firm -- the Court finds the following hourly rates to be reasonable: $375 for Partner/Principal Attorney John Troy, $160 for junior associate Attorney George Byun, and $150 for junior associate Attorney Aaron Schweitzer. See, e.g., Ye Hong v. 7 Express Rest. Corp., No. 17-CV-2174, 2019 WL 2261091, at *8 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 14, 2019), report and recommendation adopted as modified, No. 17-CV-2174, 2019 WL 1429584 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2019) (finding Plaintiff's requests for an hourly rate of $450 for John Troy, $250 for George Byun, and $150 for Aaron Schweitzer to be unreasonable and instead awarding Attorney Troy $375 per hour, Attorney Byun $150 per hour, and Attorney Schweitzer $100 per hour in connection with work performed in wage and hour action); Zhong Fa Qin v. Sensation Neo Shanghai Cuisine, Inc., No. 15-CV-6399, 2018 WL 5456653, at *9 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 9, 2018), report and recommendation adopted, No. 15-CV-6399, 2018 WL 4853041 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2018) (reducing hourly rates for associates George Byun and Aaron Schweitzer in 2018 to $150 and $100 per hour, respectively). You will you