Gulino, et al v. Board of Education, et al

Filing 9981

CLERK'S JUDGMENT FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS in favor of Plaintiffs in the amount of $2,373,457.80. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated May 31, 2022, Special Mast er John S. Siffert issued his Interim Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court grant in part Plaintiffs' twenty-fifth, twenty- sixth, and twenty-seventh motions for interim awards of attorneys' fees and costs (the "Repo rt"). (ECF No. 9977.) The Report recommends an interim award of Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs associated with work on this case by Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP from October 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021, in the total amount of $2,373,457.80. The Report reviews the complex issues addressed by counsel during the above-mentioned time period and the reasonableness of the billing rates for various attorneys and experts. These rates include a discounted rate of $ 475 per hour for Plaintiffs' new expert, Dr. Amy Hsin. The Special Master also undertook a meticulous review of attorneys' and experts' time. The Court notes that the parties have represented to the Special Master that they do not i ntend to file objections to the Report. The Report also states that Plaintiffs have not waived their claim to entitlement to the compensation they originally requested for this period. The Court has adopted all of the findings and recommendations of the Report, including the hourly rates recommended by the Special Master. The Court has awarded Plaintiffs a total of $2,373,457.80 in interim attorneys' fees and costs. The award shall be paid no later than June 30, 2022. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 6/1/2022) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km)

Download PDF
Case 1:96-cv-08414-KMW Document 9981 Filed 06/01/22 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------X ELSA GULINO, ET AL., Plaintiffs, -against- 96 CIVIL 8414 (KMW) JUDGMENT For attorney’s fees and costs THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendants. -----------------------------------------------------------X It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated May 31, 2022, Special Master John S. Siffert issued his Interim Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court grant in part Plaintiffs' twenty-fifth, twenty- sixth, and twenty-seventh motions for interim awards of attorneys' fees and costs (the "Report"). (ECF No. 9977.) The Report recommends an interim award of Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs associated with work on this case by Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP from October 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021, in the total amount of $2,373,457.80. The Report reviews the complex issues addressed by counsel during the above-mentioned time period and the reasonableness of the billing rates for various attorneys and experts. These rates include a discounted rate of $475 per hour for Plaintiffs' new expert, Dr. Amy Hsin. The Special Master also undertook a meticulous review of attorneys' and experts' time. The Court notes that the parties have represented to the Special Master that they do not intend to file objections to the Report. The Report also states that Plaintiffs have not waived their claim to entitlement to the compensation they originally requested for this period. The Court has adopted all of the findings Case 1:96-cv-08414-KMW Document 9981 Filed 06/01/22 Page 2 of 2 and recommendations of the Report, including the hourly rates recommended by the Special Master. The Court has awarded Plaintiffs a total of $2,373,457.80 in interim attorneys' fees and costs. The award shall be paid no later than June 30, 2022. Dated: New York, New York June 1, 2022 BY: RUBY J. KRAJICK _________________________ Clerk of Court _________________________ Deputy Clerk

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?