W.D. Missouri cuts consumer protection fee award 43.4%, including for missing records

What happened

The plaintiff in a consumer protection case asked for $43,285 in fees and costs. The court awarded $24,480, a reduction of $18,805 or 43.4%. It reduced the hourly rate, deducted eight hours for duplicative staffing that counsel conceded was a mistake, and noted that the time entries left it wondering whether they were made contemporaneously and generally doubting their accuracy. The figures include costs.

What the court said

it leaves the Court (1) wondering whether these time entries were made contemporaneously and (2) generally doubting their accuracy.

The court also reduced the award for: hourly rate reduced, duplicative staffing.

Why it matters

The ruling shows that a fee award can be cut even when the applicant voluntarily reduces hours for a conceded error, and that time entries that do not appear contemporaneous can lead a court to doubt their accuracy and reduce the award further.

How to keep this out of your fee petition

• Record time the same day the work happens.
• Keep the original records, not only a cleaned-up summary.
• Be able to show when each entry was created.

Cite this ruling

attorney fee motions in Missouri 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.