Scott v. City of New York
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24538
2d Cir.2010Background
- Plaintiffs, current and former NYPD employees, sued the City alleging FLSA overtime violations and sought over $700 million in damages.
- After trial, plaintiffs were awarded $900,000 for willful FLSA violations; plaintiffs then sought attorneys' fees under 29 U.S.C. §216(b).
- Puccio sought $2,035,867.50 based on rates between $750 and $1,000 and 2,090.87 hours of compensable time, supported by a 96-page time-entry attachment.
- City opposed, contending entries were duplicative, excessive in time reviewing emails, unrelated to FLSA, and that some dates preceded the events cited; questioned lack of contemporaneous records.
- District court awarded Puccio $515,179.28 at $550/hour, reduced by 20% for suspicious entries and for not submitting contemporaneous time records; both sides appealed; Puccio cross-appealed on the rate.
- This court vacated and remanded because the district court did not explain the basis for an exception to Carey’s contemporaneous-records rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Carey requires contemporaneous records for fee awards | Puccio argues Carey mandates contemporaneous records as a prerequisite. | City asserts Carey creates a mandatory rule with no room for exceptions. | Carey requires contemporaneous records; exceptions exist but must be justified on remand. |
| Whether the district court properly justified any exception to Carey | Puccio contends the court properly allowed an exception. | City contends no exception was properly explained or justified. | Remand to articulate factual basis for any exception and to determine award accordingly. |
| Whether Puccio's requested hourly rate should be reconsidered on remand | Puccio argues for higher rates based on his declaration of typical fees. | City argues rate should be based on the district court’s assessment in the remand. | Remand allows reconsideration of hours and hourly rates consistent with Carey-compliant records. |
Key Cases Cited
- New York State Ass'n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey, 711 F.2d 1136 (2d Cir.1983) (contemporaneous time records required for fee applications; strict rule with limited exceptions)
- United States v. Jacobson, 15 F.3d 19 (2d Cir.1994) (procedural framework for remand in fee disputes under Jacobson guidelines)
- McDaniel v. County of Schenectady, 595 F.3d 411 (2d Cir.2010) (abuse of discretion standard in reviewing attorney's fee awards)
- City of Riverside v. Rivera, 477 U.S. 561 (1986) (limits of fee-shifting awards; framework for reviewing district court determinations)