Shaw v. District of Columbia
253 F. Supp. 3d 267
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Justina Shaw sued the District of Columbia under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) after a hearing officer found her child was denied a free appropriate public education (FAPE).
- This Court previously awarded Shaw attorneys’ fees for the underlying IDEA litigation at full Laffey rates, totaling $46,595.25.
- Shaw moved for additional attorneys’ fees and costs for the litigation over the initial fee award ("fees on fees"). The District did not dispute the number of hours or Shaw’s request to apply a 10% reduction reflecting partial success.
- The sole contested issue was the hourly rate to apply to fees-on-fees work: Shaw sought full Laffey rates; the District urged a 50% Laffey-rate reduction.
- The Court concluded that fees-on-fees are part of the same IDEA action and awarded fees on fees at full Laffey rates, ordering $19,052.95 in fees and costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appropriate hourly rate for fees-on-fees | Apply the same full Laffey rates used in the underlying fee award | Reduce Laffey rates for fees-on-fees (suggested 50%) | Fees-on-fees arise from the same action; full Laffey rates apply |
Key Cases Cited
- Kaseman v. District of Columbia, 444 F.3d 637 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (treats fee requests as part of the same action for IDEA purposes)
- Reed v. District of Columbia, 843 F.3d 517 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (discusses whether all aspects of IDEA litigation should be treated uniformly for rates)
- Shaw v. District of Columbia, 210 F. Supp. 3d 46 (D.D.C. 2016) (court previously awarded full Laffey rates in this case)
- Jones v. District of Columbia, 153 F. Supp. 3d 114 (D.D.C. 2015) (awarded same rates for fee-litigation as for underlying IDEA litigation)
- Joaquin v. District of Columbia, 210 F. Supp. 3d 64 (D.D.C. 2016) (discusses applying reduced rates for fees-on-fees when parties did not object)