Case File
efta-efta01372148DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceEFTA Document EFTA01372148
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 10
Reference
efta-efta01372148
Pages
0
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Loading PDF viewer...
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureText extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Page 32
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97188, *
determines whether these fees are reasonable by assessing the "experience and skill of
the prevailing party's attorneys" and comparing "their rates to the rates prevailing in the
community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience, and
reputation." Rode, 892 F.2d at 1190.
Courts in this district have approved a wide range of billing rates as reasonable, and both
Plaintiffs and Defendants cite cases where courts confirmed fee rates similar to the ones
they seek. See, e.g, ECF No. 105 at 10 (citing In re Merck & Co. Vytorin ERISA Litig.,
2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12344, 2010 WL 547613 (D.N.J. Feb. 9, 2010) (approving rates up
to $835 per hour)); ECF No. 90 at 10 (citing, e.g., Port Drivers Federation 18, Inc. v. All
Saints, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93700, 2011 WL 3610100, at *4 (D.N.J. Aug. 16, 2011)
(reducing partners billing rate from $595 to $475 per hour and citing cases approving a
range of $250 to $400 per hour)). See also Saini v. BMW of North America, LLC, 2015
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66242, 2015 WL 2448846, at *15 (D.N.J. May 21, 2015) (approving
average rates of $421.73 and $540.31 in class action against BMW for failure to provide
warranties).
As discussed, Plaintiffs also argue, through the Knapton Declaration, that the requested
billing rates for most Class Counsel attorneys are lower than the third-quartile rates in the
geographic [*76] areas where the attorneys are located. See ECF No. 86-9 1148; ECF No.
86-9 Ex. 9 (Real Report Snapshot "High-Level Data Cuts" for U.S. cities). Under this
analysis, the requested billing rates are reasonable.
Defendants, however, argue that a more appropriate comparison is between the requested
billing rates and the 2015 Real Report Snapshot rates for partners and associates
practicing "General Liability" law in New York and Philadelphia, the practice area and two
cities that best correspond with the legal work in this matter and geographic location of this
Court. ECF No. 90 at 8-9 (citing ECF No. 86-9 Ex. 7 (Real Report Snapshot "Practice Area
Analysis: General Liability")). Defendants urge the Court to average the Real Report
Snapshot rates for New York and Philadelphia partners and associates practicing "General
Liability" law, arriving at mean and top-quartile partner rates of $425 and $609 per hour,
respectively, and mean and top-quartile associate rates of $284 and $345 per hour,
respectively. Id. at 10.
The Court agrees with Defendants that the average Class Counsel billing rate of $664.15
is higher than the average rate approved by many recent courts in this district. Defendants
do not p77] calculate the effect their proposed mean and top-quartile "General Liability"
rate adjustments would have on the lodestar. Using the Knapton Declaration's fee
schedule, ECF No. 86-9 Ex. 2,9 the Court calculates that Class Counsel partners billed a
total of 3,542.1 hours; that the "associate class," including associates, law clerks, local
counsel, and of-counsel attorneys, billed a total of 1,323.55 hours; and that paralegals
billed a total of 234.7 hours. Adjusting all associate and partner billing rates to the mean
and top-quartile rates proposed by Defendants would result in lodestars of $1,917,673.40
and $2,649,473.15, respectively. Id.
9 There are several discrepancies between the hours reported in the Class Counsel affidavits and the hours used by Mr.
Knapton to calculate Plaintiffs' lodestar of 3,387.328 75. Most notably. John A Yanchunis of Morgan & Morgan reports that he
billed 38.3 hours at a rate of $930 per hour and that Teresa Ponder, a paralegal, billed 84.2 hours at a rate of $150, for a firm
lodestar of 547.100. ECF No. 86-5 ¶ 17; ECF No. 86-5 Ex. B (time report). The Knapton Declaration calculates Plaintiffs'
For internal use only
CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e)
DB-SDNY-0065761
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00211945
EFTA01372148
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.