Case Update (24 May 2023): Efthymiou v. Labonte, Hague Abduction attorney fees reduced for repetitive presentation of evidence, certain unnecessary costs, and respondent's financial circumstances

The petitioner was entitled to a reduced fee award for prevailing in the petition to return his minor child to Cyprus. Petitioner requested an award of $199,878.84. In determining what of this amount was "necessary," the court made note that Petitioner was not seeking money related to his expert, who the court states "was 'neither reliable nor credible'," his travel expenses to California to collect the child at the end of last summer, or most of his living expenses while in California to litigate the case. The court deducted $16,870 of redacted expenses because it was "impossible to determine whether they were necessary or appropriate." It deducted $24,170 for consultations with the expert for which the Petitioner was not seeking costs. Some of the bills included these amounts in single line items, which made it difficult for the court to "tease apart such entries" and therefore it set aside the entire amount billed. The court also deducted $3,850 for the Petitioner's lawyers' flying time from Chicago to San Francisco, believing it was an oversight, as they wrote off their flight time back. Plus, transit time is not covered by the statute. Further, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that his lawyers needed to be in California in October (deducting $3,431.52), nor that it was necessary to have both of his lawyers attend the parties' depositions (deducting $2,450 and $1,925). The court also deducted $775 for an unnecessary motion to exclude the respondent's expert. Further, while the petitioner's lawyers were both at trial, which is necessary, the court found their presentation of evidence "excessively repetitive, driving up the costs significantly", and therefore reduced their costs by half to $15,600. The court deducted $1,925 for a no-contact motion that was never filed in the court case. Therefore, the total, after deductions is $128,882.32. Finally, the court reduced this by 1/3 to account for the respondent's own financial situation. The final fee award was $85,921.55.

Melissa Kucinski

Melissa Kucinski works with family lawyers to strategically resolve their clients’ complex international cases.  A fellow of the AAML, the IAFL, and chair of international family law committees in the American Bar and New York State Bar Associations, Melissa is a respected colleague to have on any legal team.  A former consultant for the Hague Conference on Private International Law, member of the Uniform Law Commission’s Joint Editorial Board on Uniform Family Laws, and member of the U.S. Secretary of State’s Advisory Committee on Private International Law, Melissa maintains a robust network to help her clients in international disputes.

https://mkfamily.law/
Previous
Previous

Case Update (26 May 2023): Silva v. Dos Santos; district court applied the wrong standard in weighing evidence of grave risk, and therefore the order returning the child is vacated and case remanded

Next
Next

Case Update (22 May 2023): Mahdavi v. Mahdavi; caution when settling a civil divorce suit when there may be a companion religious divorce needed