Dl v. District of Columbia
267 F. Supp. 3d 55
D.D.C.2017Background
- DL v. District of Columbia (DC) addressed plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees after prevailing on IDEA and Rehabilitation Act claims.
- Claims asserted under IDEA, Rehabilitation Act, and DC law regarding Child Find and FAPE for preschoolers with disabilities.
- Four subclasses alleged District failures: 1) identification, 2) timely initial evaluations, 3) timely eligibility determinations, 4) smooth transitions from Part C to Part B.
- Court treated case as IDEA-centered for fee purposes; Rehabilitation Act claims rested on IDEA violations.
- Court held fee caps do not apply and undertook lodestar calculation using current USAO Matrix rates with reductions, yielding partial grant of fees and costs.
- Court required revised calculation from plaintiffs before ordering payment by DC.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are IDEA fee caps applicable? | DL contends caps apply. | DC argues caps should apply to reduce fees. | Fee caps do not apply; class size exceeds cap threshold. |
| What fee matrix and rates govern? | LSI rates should apply as prevailing market rates. | USAO Matrix more reliable for prevailing rates. | USAO Matrix adopted as the reasonable rate baseline. |
| Should current or historic rates apply for Periods 1 and 2? | Historic rates plus interest should be used for Period 1 | Current rates should apply for both periods. | Current rates apply for both periods. |
| Are claimed hours reasonable and properly billed? | Hours reasonably expended; billing judgments made; no broad overbilling. | Hours excessive; unreasonable billing entries and clerical tasks overstated. | Hours largely reasonable after reductions; 101.64 paralegal hours non-compensable; 5% success-based reduction. |
| Are expert fees recoverable and how treated? | Expert expenses recoverable under Rehabilitation Act. | Expert fees not recoverable or limited. | Expert fees recoverable under Rehabilitation Act; $121,207.82 awarded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Joaquin v. D.C., 210 F. Supp. 3d 64 (D.D.C. 2016) (framework for IDEA fee analysis; lodestar approach and prevailing market rates)
- Eley v. District of Columbia, 793 F.3d 97 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (complex federal litigation framework and range of rate evidence)
- Salazar v. District of Columbia, 809 F.3d 58 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (LSI vs Laffey matrix consideration in IDEA fee awards)
- Blackman v. D.C., 633 F.3d 1088 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (fee caps interpretation in DC IDEA cases; class action context)
- Missouri v. Jenkins by Agyei, 491 U.S. 274 (1989) (use of current vs historic rates as remedy for delayed payment)