942 F. Supp. 2d 71
D.D.C.2013Background
- Berke, a deaf prisoner, sued the BOP and its Director under the Rehabilitation Act for failing to accommodate his deafness.
- In September 2012, the court preliminarily enjoined part of the relief, requiring an analysis of whether a videophone could be installed without undue burden.
- Before ruling, Berke was reassigned to SPC Tucson and the BOP agreed to several accommodations there (TTY, interpreter, closed-captioning, etc.).
- Berke pursued the videophone issue despite accommodations, seeking a ruling that a videophone must be provided.
- The court found no written agency analysis of undue-burden determinations and ordered a formal investigation, while approving a stipulation outlining accommodations.
- Berke moved for attorney’s fees and costs; the court granted in part and denied in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prevailing party status must be shown | Berke achieved relief via partial injunction and stipulation. | Accommodation steps and transfer were voluntary, not enforceable relief. | Berke is a prevailing party due to partial injunction relief. |
| Reasonableness of attorneys’ fees | WLCCR and Ballard Spahr rates and hours are reasonable. | Some rates and hours are excessive; require adjustment. | Fees awarded using USAO Laffey rates with a 40% hours reduction. |
| Recoverable costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 | Most costs are recoverable as reasonable litigation expenses. | Certain costs exceed § 1920 categories and are not recoverable. | Costs awarded for specified § 1920 categories; 40% overall reduction applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dep’t of Health & Human Res., 532 U.S. 598 (U.S. 2001) (prevailing party requires judicial relief, not catalyst theory)
- Texas State Teachers Ass’n v. Garland Indep. Sch. Dist., 489 U.S. 782 (U.S. 1989) (touchstone for prevailing party: material alteration of legal relationship)
- Edmonds v. F.B.I., 417 F.3d 1319 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (three-part test for prevailing-party status in this circuit)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (U.S. 1983) (lodestar the starting point for attorney’s fees; degree of success matters)
- Pleasants v. Ridge, 424 F. Supp. 2d 67 (D.D.C. 2006) (adjust fees based on overall relief obtained)
- Goos v. Nat’l Ass’n of Realtors, 68 F.3d 1380 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (same factual scenario warrants consideration of overall relief in fee awards)