Sierra Club v. McCarthy
235 F. Supp. 3d 63
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- EPA revised sulfur dioxide (SO2) standards in June 2010 and designated non-attainment areas in 16 states in August 2013; states had 18 months to submit SIPs and EPA had a nondiscretionary duty to issue findings of failure to submit if states missed deadlines.
- Fifteen states missed the April 2015 SIP deadline; by October 2015 EPA had a duty to issue findings but had not done so.
- Sierra Club sent a Notice of Intent on October 15, 2015, sued after the 60-day period elapsed (Complaint filed December 29, 2015), and engaged in communications with DOJ/EPA counsel in January–February 2016 discussing potential resolution.
- EPA signed a final rule addressing the nondiscretionary duty on March 10, 2016, mooting the suit; the parties jointly dismissed the case.
- Sierra Club moved for attorney fees under the CAA, seeking $25,371.50 in fees, $440.16 in costs, and $14,462.50 for fees-for-fees; EPA conceded prevailing-party status and reasonableness of hourly rates but challenged the reasonableness/necessity of many hours billed.
- The Court applied the lodestar method, disallowed fees for work on an unfiled summary judgment motion and most drafting of unfiled standing declarations, limited fees-for-fees, and awarded $17,184.04 in attorney fees and $440.16 in costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prevailing party status | Sierra Club achieved the relief sought when EPA acted; thus eligible for fees | EPA conceded status | Held for Sierra Club (fees available under 42 U.S.C. § 7604(d)) |
| Reasonableness of hourly rates | Rates ($386 and $325) reasonable per Laffey Matrix | EPA did not dispute rates | Rates accepted |
| Compensability of time on unfiled summary judgment motion | Time reasonably expended preparing a dispositive motion | Work was unnecessary and premature given case posture and settlement discussions | Disallowed all 23.1 hours for the unfiled summary judgment work |
| Compensability of time on unfiled standing declarations | Time necessary to establish Article III standing | Drafting declarations was unnecessary; limited pre-filing work to verify standing was reasonable | Disallowed drafting time; awarded 3.15 hours for pre-filing standing assessment |
| Reasonableness of time for core litigation tasks (NOI, complaint, communications, motion to dismiss) | Time spent was reasonable and already reduced by 10% for overlap | Some hours excessive but no specific inefficiencies identified | Awarded 29.48 hours for these tasks as reasonable |
| Fees-for-fees (time on fee motion and reply) | Entitled to recover fees for fees; sought 25.1 hours + 19.4 hours | If awarded, should be reduced proportionally to success rate (over 70% reduction argued) | Awarded fees-for-fees but reduced 50%; total 18.825 hours allowed for fee motion and reply |
Key Cases Cited
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (lodestar method and exclusion of excessive or unnecessary hours)
- New Jersey v. E.P.A., 703 F.3d 110 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (discussion of lodestar calculation)
- Am. Petroleum Inst. v. U.S. E.P.A., 72 F.3d 907 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (burden to demonstrate reasonableness of fee elements)
- Envtl. Def. Fund, Inc. v. E.P.A., 716 F.2d 915 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (plaintiff is prevailing party when agency takes the action sought)
- Role Models Am., Inc. v. Brownlee, 353 F.3d 962 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (courts should ensure taxpayers only reimburse fees actually needed to obtain the result)
- Sierra Club v. Jackson, 926 F. Supp. 2d 341 (D.D.C. 2013) (awarding fees-for-fees where motion for attorney fees is successful)