N.D. Ohio cuts civil rights fee award 0.8%, including for vague entries

What happened

The fee applicant sought $43,111 in sanctions. The court awarded $42,762.30, a reduction of $348.70. It cut hours on eleven entries by 20% for duplicative staffing, reducing fees by $62.70. It declined to award $203.50 in fees tied to addressing an appeal of the court's dismissal. It also reduced fees by $82.50 because a time entry lacked a description, leaving no basis to find the hours reasonably expended.

What the court said

A time entry without a description provides no basis for me to determine with a high degree of certainty that such hours were actually and reasonably expended in the prosecution of the litigation.

The court also reduced the award for: duplicative staffing, unrelated claims.

Why it matters

The ruling shows that even a small reduction can rest partly on recordkeeping: an entry without a description may be cut because the court cannot verify the work. It also shows courts will separate fees for unrelated claims and trim duplicative staffing before awarding sanctions.

How to keep this out of your fee petition

• Name the task, the document or person involved, and the purpose.
• Avoid stock phrases that could describe any day in any matter.
• Keep privileged detail general, but specific enough to show the work.

Cite this ruling

See hourly rates the N.D. Ohio approves and attorney fee motions in Ohio federal courts.

Figures and quotes are taken from the opinion and checked against its text. Spot an error? Email team@legaltime.ai with the case name and we will correct it. Summaries of public court opinions. Not legal advice.