Syrnik v. Polones Construction Corporation, 1:11-cv-07754

Background

Syrnik, plaintiff, filed suit in 2011 alleging unlawful employment practices under §1981, Title VII, NYSHRL, and NYC Human Rights Law against Polones Construction Corp.
A jury found in favor of Syrnik at trial on July 16–17, 2012, with a judgment around $606,000 entered August 3, 2012.
Syrnik moved for attorneys’ fees and costs on August 15, 2012; defendant did not file a response to oppose the motion.
Defendant filed a notice of appeal on September 4, 2012, but did not oppose the motion at that time or thereafter.
The court addresses collateral matters (fees, costs, and interest) despite the appeal ongoing, and ultimately awards partial fees and costs.
Court approves fees and costs as reasonable, and awards pre- and post-judgment interest as appropriate.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court has jurisdiction to decide fees despite the appeal.	Syrnik argues collateral matters remain under court's jurisdiction.	Polones contends appellate jurisdiction may divest district court over fee issues.	Court retains jurisdiction over collateral fee issues.
Whether Syrnik is a prevailing party eligible for attorneys’ fees.	Plaintiff prevailed on civil rights claims and is entitled to fees.	Not explicitly represented; likely opposition would question entitlement.	Syrnik is a prevailing party eligible for fees.
What is the reasonable attorneys’ fee award based on hours and rates.	Requested $196,258.50 based on higher rates for senior attorneys and staff.	Not provided; court evaluates reasonableness.	Court approves $142,250.00 in attorneys’ fees after reducing hours.
Whether costs are recoverable and the amount awarded.	Costs reasonably incurred should be reimbursed.	Not provided; standard rule supports recovery of recoverable costs.	Court awards $9,535.49 in costs (after removing non-taxable items).
Whether pre- and post-judgment interest should be awarded.	Pre-judgment interest should compensate back pay; post-judgment interest is mandatory.	Not argued; generally no counterpoints raised.	Pre-judgment interest on back pay awarded; post-judgment interest awarded on all money judgments.

Key Cases Cited

Durant, Nichols, Houston, Hodgson & Cortese-Costa, P.C. v. Dupont, 565 F.3d 56 (2d Cir. 2009) (jurisdictional considerations for collateral matters in waiving appeal influence)
Griggs v. Provident Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56 ((1982)) (limits on fee awards under civil rights statutes)
Tancredi v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 378 F.3d 220 (2d Cir. 2004) (residual jurisdiction over fees after notice of appeal)
Valley Disposal, Inc. v. Cent. Vt. Solid Waste Mgmt. Dist., 71 F.3d 1053 (2d Cir. 1995) (affirming district court’s authority over costs as collateral matter)
Arbor Hill Concerned Citizens Neighborhood Ass'n v. Cnty. of Albany, 522 F.3d 182 (2d Cir. 2007) (standard for determining reasonable attorneys’ fees (hourly rate × hours))
Raishevich v. Foster, 247 F.3d 337 (2d Cir. 2001) (presumption in favor of fee awards in civil rights actions)
Kerr v. Quinn, 692 F.2d 875 (2d Cir. 1982) (limits on fee awards and consideration of injustice in granting fees)
Newman v. Piggie Park Enters., Inc., 390 U.S. 400 (1968) (fee-shifting policy encouraging civil rights enforcement)
Loeffler v. City of Glens Falls, 487 U.S. 549 (1988) (prejudgment interest in back pay contexts)
Clark v. Frank, 960 F.2d 1146 (2d Cir. 1992) (prejudgment interest in back-pay awards under Title VII)
Donovan v. Sovereign Sec., Ltd., 726 F.2d 55 (2d Cir. 1984) (prejudgment interest in civil rights back-pay awards)
Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys. v. Pharaon, 169 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 1999) (no prejudgment interest on penalties)
Greenway v. Buffalo Hilton Hotel, 143 F.3d 47 (2d Cir. 1998) (prejudgment/post-judgment interest framework)
Bergerson v. N.Y. State Office of Mental Health, 652 F.3d 277 (2d Cir. 2011) (guide to calculating reasonable fee awards)