Alicea v. City of New York
272 F. Supp. 3d 603
S.D.N.Y.2017Background
- Plaintiff Edmin Alicea sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging excessive force, false arrest, malicious prosecution and related claims against multiple NYPD officers and the City; claims and defendants were amended and narrowed over time.
- At trial plaintiff’s theory focused on Officer Paul Arico’s use of excessive force when handcuffing and lifting plaintiff’s arms, causing a shoulder injury; failure-to-intervene claims were brought against Officers Rivas and Regan; malicious prosecution claim remained against Rivas.
- Four-day jury trial resulted in a verdict for Alicea against Officer Arico: $150,000 compensatory and $25,000 punitive damages; Rivas and Regan were found not liable.
- Alicea moved under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for $847,060 in attorney’s fees and $11,944.91 in costs; defendants contested reasonableness and sought a much lower award.
- The court applied the lodestar approach, evaluated hourly rates and hours billed, found several rates reasonable (with a reduction for one lawyer who did not try the case), but concluded the total hours (1,722) were excessive and reduced them by 50%, awarding $410,071.25 in attorneys’ fees.
- The court denied unreconciled cost items for lack of documentation and awarded $3,443.87 in costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to fees | Alicea is a prevailing party entitled to reasonable fees under § 1988 | N/A (defendants conceded entitlement only disputed amount) | Prevailing party status established; fees award appropriate |
| Hourly rates | Firm sought high-end rates for experienced counsel (Reibman $625, Weiner $625, Sanborn $500, Massimi $300, Barry $150) | Rates for some attorneys (esp. Weiner) are excessive | Reibman, Sanborn, Massimi, Barry rates reasonable; Weiner reduced to $560 due to limited role |
| Reasonable number of hours | Firm sought 1,722 hours (no significant reductions) | Hours excessive, duplicative, and caused by overbroad pleadings and unnecessary work | Court found hours excessive and applied a 50% across-the-board reduction to yield 861 compensable hours |
| Recoverable costs | Sought $11,944.91 for litigation expenses | Defendants challenged reasonableness and documentation | Insufficient documentation; only $3,443.87 awarded |
Key Cases Cited
- Simmons v. N.Y. City Transit Auth., 575 F.3d 170 (2d Cir. 2009) (lodestar and presumptively reasonable fee standard)
- Arbor Hill Concerned Citizens Neighborhood Ass'n v. County of Albany, 522 F.3d 182 (2d Cir. 2008) (factors for fee determinations)
- DiFilippo v. Morizio, 759 F.2d 231 (2d Cir. 1985) (examination of hours and value of specific expenditures)
- Kirsch v. Fleet St., Ltd., 148 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 1998) (court may exclude excessive or redundant hours; percentage reductions permissible)
- Grant v. Martinez, 973 F.2d 96 (2d Cir. 1992) (reasonableness judged by what a reasonable attorney would have done at the time)
- LeBlanc-Sternberg v. Fletcher, 143 F.3d 748 (2d Cir. 1998) (recoverable out-of-pocket litigation expenses)
- Barbour v. City of White Plains, 788 F. Supp. 2d 216 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (guidance on reasonable civil-rights attorney rates)
- Houston v. Cotter, 234 F. Supp. 3d 392 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (approving substantial percentage reductions for excessive hours)