District of Columbia cuts employment fee award 38.5%, including for clerical work | LegalTime AI

District of Columbia cuts employment fee award 38.5%, including for clerical work

SARGENT v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE et al, No. 1:19-cv-00620. District Court, District of Columbia, Judge Carl J. Nichols. Decided . Read the opinion

Requested
$537,782.30
Awarded
$330,655.50
Cut
38.5%$207,126.80

Employment · Title VII · Figures include costs

What happened

Sargent sought $537,782.30 in Title VII fees, including costs. The court awarded $330,655.50, a reduction of $207,126.80 or 38.5%. The parties agreed to a $9,822.50 deduction for unsuccessful claims against the State Department. The court cut fees for clerical work by 25% on the affected entries, a $1,775.25 reduction, and deducted $1,539 for vague entries. It also deducted 25% of fees for duplicative staffing, $17,689.75, and reduced the total fee by 25% for limited success.

What the court said

Clerical work billed as legal work · 25% reduction · $1,775.25
The Court will therefore permit these services to be compensated at a 25% discount, amounting to a $1,775.25 reduction in Sargent's fees.
Vague entries · $1,539
In total, the Court will deduct $1,539 from Sargent's fees for these sorts of entries—less than a third of the deduction that SOC proposed.

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

Why it matters

The ruling shows courts will separate clerical tasks from legal work and discount entries that do not describe the task, even when the overall reduction is driven by other factors. It also shows that vague time entries draw deductions based on the court's review of the records rather than the full amount requested by the opposing party.

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

SARGENT v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, No. 1:19-cv-00620 (D.D.C. Sept. 12, 2025)

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.

More rulings like this

All rulings in the Fee Cut Tracker