In accordance with the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. For the reasons detailed herein, this court awards plaintiff $167,454.18 in fees, and $16,237.79 in costs, for a total of $183,691.97.
In this court's view, the $800 hourly rate charged is excessive, as is the number of hours spent on this litigation. It also seeks compensation for close to 1,000 hours of attorneys' time. Stern completed, but which could have been done by attorneys with lesser experience. This calculation is based in part on an hourly rate for lead counsel, Mark Stern, of $800 per hour for approximately half of his work, and $400 per hour for work that Mr. By this motion, the plaintiff's counsel is seeking $488,660.80 in fees, and $16,237.79 in costs, for a total amount of $504,898.59. Consequently, the matter is presently before this court on "Plaintiffs' Amended Motion to Assess Costs Including Reasonable Attorney's Fees." (Docket No. Before trial, the parties settled Meagher's claim for $100,000.00, leaving to the court the issue of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.
Andover teacher union class actio trial#
This court further held that the plaintiff had failed to establish a triable issue with respect to her claims under the MCRA.Ī trial was scheduled on the issue of damages. In a decision dated March 31, 2015, this court concluded that Meagher had been unlawfully dismissed from her employment in retaliation for protected speech, but that McGrath was immune from liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity. Eventually, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment as to liability only. Instead, an extensive motion practice followed, with each side blaming the other for the need for court involvement. Although this case presented a limited legal issue, and the facts were basically known to the parties through the unfair labor practices proceeding, the parties were unable to effectu-ate a streamlined presentation of the case for resolution.
2d 689 (2006), and whether Meagher's email was entitled to protection under the First Amendment as a statement made as a citizen on a matter of public concern. The fundamental issue raised by this case was the application of Garcetti v. Meagher continued to pursue her claims against the defendants in this action. The School Committee was ordered to reinstate Meagher to her teaching position at AHS and to compensate Meagher for all losses she had suffered, if any, as a result of the unlawful action. On July 2, 2013, while this suit was pending, the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board ("CERB" or "Board") issued its decision in connection with an unfair labor practices charge filed by the union, finding Meagher's termination was in response to protected concerted activity and that her employer had discriminated against her based on her union activity in violation of Massachusetts law. § 1983 ("Section 1983") and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, Mass. Meagher asserted claims against the Andover School Committee (the "ASC" or "Committee"), the Andover School Department and the Superintendent of the Andover Public Schools, Marinel McGrath ("McGrath"), for violations of her rights under 42 U.S.C.
Meagher saw this as an opportunity to advance the teachers' union's collective bargaining goals, while the school characterized it as unlawfully encouraging a work stoppage. It has never been disputed that the termination was based on Meagher having sent an email to approximately 60 of her colleagues urging them to vote against certain reports required as part of the school's accreditation application. This suit, filed on May 30, 2013, arises out of the September 2012 termination of the plaintiff, Jennifer Meagher ("Meagher"), from her employment as a tenured teacher at Andover High School ("AHS") in Andover, Massachusetts. MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED MOTION TO ASSESS COSTS INCLUDING REASONABLE ATTORNEY'S FEES
0 kommentar(er)
