Baker v. Lindgren, 856 F.3d 498

Background

Kenneth Baker and family sued the City of Chicago, eight police officers, Reliable Recovery and its employees, alleging Section 1983 claims (e.g., illegal entry, search, false arrest, failure to intervene, conspiracy) and Illinois tort claims (trespass, intentional infliction of emotional distress, malicious prosecution).
Incident arose when repossession agent Timothy Ghidotti attempted to repossess a vehicle at Juanita Horton’s stepfather’s home; Ghidotti called 911 claiming he felt threatened; officers arrested Kenneth Baker for aggravated assault and seized a shotgun; charges were later dropped after multiple court appearances.
On summary judgment, the court granted Baker judgment on false arrest (liability only), denied summary judgment on several federal claims, dismissed unknown officers for failure to identify, and narrowed several state-law claims against Reliable Recovery.
At trial the jury awarded Baker $25,000 for false arrest and $5,000 for malicious prosecution (aggravated assault); defendants prevailed on remaining claims.
Baker sought $450,268 in attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and costs; the district court reduced rates/hours, cut the lodestar by 50% for limited success, awarded fees of $164,395, denied Baker costs, and awarded costs against two other plaintiffs.
On appeal, the Seventh Circuit affirmed most adjustments but found the district court had double‑discounted 77.9 hours attributable to state-law Reliable Recovery work and remanded to add those hours back into the lodestar.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plaintiffs were entitled to costs as prevailing parties under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1)	Baker: $30,000 recovery is a substantial victory warranting costs	City: overall defendants prevailed on substantial part of litigation; costs appropriate for plaintiffs who lost all claims	District court did not abuse discretion in denying costs to Baker and awarding costs against Barbara and Camden; affirmed
Whether Baker was entitled to § 1988 attorney’s fees and the proper amount	Baker: prevailing on false arrest; fee award should not be reduced as district court erred in many hourly/rate deductions and in a 50% lodestar cut	City: various reductions appropriate given limited success; objected to hours attributable to Reliable Recovery/state claims	Baker was a prevailing § 1983 party; district court’s discretionary reductions largely upheld, except remand to correct double‑discount of 77.9 hours
Whether district court erred by double‑discounting hours for Reliable Recovery work	Baker: he had already voluntarily deducted ~84.2 hours; court double‑counted and must add 77.9 hours back	City: contends issue was waived and district court properly treated defendant chart as additional hours	Seventh Circuit found the court erred in double‑discounting, Baker did not waive the issue; remanded to add 77.9 hours back into lodestar
Standard of review for fee and cost determinations	Baker: sought de novo review for many adjustments	City: discretionary abuse‑of‑discretion review	Court applied abuse‑of‑discretion for factual adjustments and fee determinations; legal questions (e.g., waiver) reviewed de novo; affirmed most discretionary rulings

Key Cases Cited

Myrick v. WellPoint, Inc., 764 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 2014) (abuse-of-discretion review of costs)
Rivera v. City of Chicago, 469 F.3d 631 (7th Cir. 2006) (costs standard under Rule 54)
Cruz v. Town of Cicero, Ill., 275 F.3d 579 (7th Cir. 2001) (attorney-fee and costs review)
Testa v. Village of Mundelein, Ill., 89 F.3d 443 (7th Cir. 1996) (definition of prevailing party for costs)
Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (lodestar method and degree-of-success inquiry for § 1988 fees)
Republic Tobacco Co. v. North Atlantic Trading Co., 481 F.3d 442 (7th Cir. 2007) (interpretation of "prevailing party")
Brooks v. City of Chicago, 564 F.3d 830 (7th Cir. 2009) (waiver of arguments raised first in motion to reconsider)
e360 Insight v. The Spamhaus Project, 500 F.3d 594 (7th Cir. 2007) (standard of review for waiver findings)
Richardson v. City of Chicago, 740 F.3d 1099 (7th Cir. 2014) (§ 1988 does not cover fees for state-law claims)
Vesely v. Armslist LLC, 762 F.3d 661 (7th Cir. 2014) (Rule 59(e) and manifest error)