District of Columbia cuts FOIA fee award, including for clerical work

What happened

The plaintiff sought attorney fees under FOIA. The court did not state totals. It identified about eight hours billed for clerical tasks or unsuccessful motions, about twenty-five hours for excessive or unnecessary tasks, and many entries too vague to confirm the hours were reasonably expended. It also noted counsel had been criticized by another judge in the District for similar issues. The fees-on-fees petition was only partially successful, so the court allowed 50% of the hours sought, citing vague records as one reason.

What the court said

First, around eight hours were improperly billed for clerical tasks or motions on which plaintiff was ultimately unsuccessful.

Third, many of counsel’s time entries were not sufficiently detailed to allow the Court to determine with a “high degree of certainty” that the hours in this case were reasonably and actually expended.

One important reason is that the records included in the petition were not sufficiently well-described to provide the Court with the requisite certainty that the hours were reasonably expended.

The court also reduced the award for: excessive hours, other, limited success.

Why it matters

The ruling shows courts will reduce FOIA fee awards when time entries do not separate clerical tasks from legal work or describe the work with enough detail to verify it. It also shows a prior judicial warning about billing practices can factor into a later fee decision.

How to keep this out of your fee petition

• Leave purely clerical work off the fee petition.
• Describe paralegal tasks so the substantive work is clear.
• Split mixed entries into their substantive and clerical parts.

Cite this ruling

See hourly rates the District of Columbia approves and attorney fee motions in District of Columbia 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.