A recent Legal Intelligencer story, “Littler Mendelson Hit with Fees By Federal Court in Case it Won,” reports that Littler Mendelson has been ordered to pay sanctions in a case that is won on summary judgment in federal court in Philadelphia.
Last month, the law firm won an employment discrimination suit that had been filed against its client, Fox Chase Cancer Center, but the motions it filed seeking attorney fees and sanctions against the plaintiff were so lacking that U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that the motions were intended only to harass and imposed sanctions under Section 1927, which holds counsel liable for causing excessive costs, on the firm.
Elaine Barley, who was represented by lawyers from Margolis Edelstein, had initially brought the suit alleging that Fox Chase had violated the American with Disabilities Act when it failed to accommodate her asthma condition. She also claimed discrimination. Barley lost on summary judgment because her claims were at odds with her position to the Social Security Administration from which she collects disability benefits.
On Sept. 22—19 days after Datzell issued his summary opinion—Littler Mendelson filed a motion to collect attorney fees and a motion for sanctions against Barley. It based its motion for nearly $126,000 in attorney fees on the argument that Barley’s suit was frivolous, but it missed the deadline for filing the motion by five days. The motion was so heavily redacted that it looked as if the firm was “guarding top-secret information involving national security,” Dalzell said. It offered to furnish the court with unredacted copies, but not the plaintiff, Dalzell said.
“These supposedly reasonable hours multiplied by Littler Mendelson’s putative reasonable rates, Fox Chase avers, total $125,907.05, which it describes without evident embarrassment as a “presumptively reasonable” amount ‘necessary’ to Fox Chase’s defense,” the judge said. He denied the motion for attorney fees after rejecting Fox Chase’s argument that the suit was frivolous, but went on to find the motion was so heavily redacted that it wouldn’t merit an award of attorney fees anyway.
“Although we conclude that Barley’s claims were not brought frivolously and therefore Fox Chase is not entitled to attorney fees, we also find Fox Chase’s redacted fee submission is insufficient to support any claim for attorney fees,” Dalzell said. “Contrary to Fox Chase’s assertion that it spent the ‘presumptively reasonable’ amount ‘necessary’ to prevail, other legal professionals might reasonably question a $125.907.05 expenditure in a discrimination case brought by a probationary clerical employee. Be that as it may, Fox Chase gave us no choice but to deny its motion for fees which it actually asks us and Ms. Barley to take on faith.”
On Oct. 15, Barley asked the judge to sanction Littler Mendelson under Section 1927 of the U.S. Code. “To impose sanctions under Section 1927, we must find that counsel has (1) multiplied ‘the proceedings’; (2) in an unreasonable and vexatious manner; (3) thereby increasing the cost of the ‘proceedings’; and (4) did so in bad faith or by intentional misconduct,” Dalzell explained. He held that Littler Mendelson’s two motions qualified for sanction under that section “without question.” He ordered the firm to pay Barley’s attorney fees for defending the two motions.