Wan v. YWL USA Inc
7:18-cv-10334
S.D.N.Y.May 12, 2021Background
- Plaintiff Lu Wan sued under the FLSA and NYLL (wage-and-hour claims) on behalf of himself and a putative collective, originally naming 12 defendants.
- Court granted judgment on the pleadings for nine moving defendants; remaining defendants were YWL USA Inc., Ai Qin Chen, and Jane Doe.
- Court conditionally certified a limited collective (certain kitchen positions at one restaurant); Plaintiff and Defendants repeatedly missed deadlines and failed to follow court orders.
- On the eve of trial Defendants served a Rule 68 offer: $15,000 plus fees, costs, and expenses to be determined by the court; Plaintiff accepted.
- Plaintiff moved for fees and costs totaling $62,675.98; Defendants opposed as to entitlement, hourly rates, excessive hours, limited success, and certain costs.
- Court awarded $17,703.90 in attorneys’ fees and $1,491.73 in costs (total $19,195.63), applying rate reductions, percentage cuts for excessive/clerical billing, and excluding certain hours and minor costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement (prevailing party) | Rule 68 judgment makes Lu Wan prevailing and entitled to reasonable fees and costs | Claim that plaintiff did not prevail against nine dismissed defendants so fees should be limited | Rule 68 makes plaintiff a prevailing party under FLSA/NYLL; dismissal of some defendants bears on degree of success but not threshold entitlement |
| Reasonable hourly rates | Counsel sought market rates previously awarded ($550 for Troy; $350 Schweitzer; lower for others) | Rates are excessive; propose substantially lower rates (e.g., $300 for Troy, much less for associates) | Court set rates: $325/hr (Troy); $175/hr (Schweitzer); $125/hr (Lim); $75/hr (Kilaru); $75/hr (Tiffany) based on district precedent and quality of work |
| Hours expended / administrative billing | Sought recovery for all billed time in contemporaneous records | Much time was clerical, excessive, redundant; some work unconnected to prevailing claims | Court applied adjustments: reclassified 5% of certain attorney time to paralegal rate, trimmed 40% of hours for several attorneys as excessive, excluded 7.83 hrs spent opposing dismissed-defendant motion; used percentage reduction rather than parsing every entry |
| Degree of success / downward adjustment to lodestar | Requested full lodestar (no further reduction) | Urged 50% reduction because nine defendants dismissed and limited collective; few opt-ins | Court declined further reduction after already accounting for performance in rates and hours; lack of opt-ins not a basis to reduce award |
| Costs recoverable | Sought $1,501.48 for out-of-pocket expenses (postage, printing, binders, etc.) | Objected to office-supply items (envelopes, binders) and insufficient documentation | Court awarded $1,491.73 after excluding $9.75 for envelopes/binders; other listed costs were adequately documented and recoverable |
Key Cases Cited
- Fisher v. SD Prot. Inc., 948 F.3d 593 (2d Cir.) (fee entitlement under FLSA/NYLL)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (U.S.) (prevailing-party standard and lodestar framework)
- Millea v. Metro-N. R.R. Co., 658 F.3d 154 (2d Cir.) (exclude hours for unsuccessful fee-shifting claims)
- Lilly v. City of N.Y., 934 F.3d 222 (2d Cir.) (hourly-rate determination and lodestar adjustments)
- Arbor Hill Concerned Citizens Neighborhood Ass'n v. County of Albany, 522 F.3d 182 (2d Cir.) (Johnson factors for reasonable rate)
- Quaratino v. Tiffany & Co., 166 F.3d 422 (2d Cir.) (inextricably intertwined claims and fee allocation)
- Missouri v. Jenkins by Agyei, 491 U.S. 274 (U.S.) (clerical tasks not compensable at attorney rates)
- Stanczyk v. City of N.Y., 752 F.3d 273 (2d Cir.) (district court discretion to reduce lodestar for degree of success)
- Westport Ins. Corp. v. Hamilton Wharton Grp. Inc., [citation="483 F. App'x 599"] (2d Cir.) (recoverable litigation out-of-pocket expenses)