|
In Aldinger v Segler, 157 Fed. Appx. 317 (1st
Cir.,2005) [Not for Publication in Federal Reporter] after the
petitioner-father Jurgen Peter Aldinger prevailed in obtaining an order
requiring the respondent-mother Kedra Adele Segler to return their minor
children to Germany, the district court, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
11607(b)(3), ordered Ms. Segler to pay Mr. Aldinger's attorneys' fees
and travel expenses in the amount of $17,775. Mr. Aldinger argued on
appeal that the court awarded too little. The First Circuit affirmed.
Mr. Aldinger claimed on appeal that the
district court misapplied 42 U.S.C. 11607(b)(3). It reviews fee and
expense awards for mistake of law or abuse of discretion. There was no
basis to disturb the award. While Mr. Aldinger argued that a court may
modify an award of the requested fees and costs only if the respondent
establishes that such an award would be "clearly inappropriate," he
ignored the fact that the court also has the obligation to determine
whether the requested fees and costs were "necessary" to secure the
children's return. Thus, the court did not err in considering the
necessity of each expense. Mr. Aldinger also argued that the court erred
by failing to engage in a lodestar analysis of the attorneys' fees. A
court employing the lodestar method multiplies the number of hours
reasonably spent on a case by a reasonable hourly rate to arrive at the
lodestar figure. To determine a reasonable number of hours, a court may
subtract "hours which were duplicative, unproductive, excessive, or
otherwise unnecessary." It did not reach the question of whether the
lodestar method was required finding that the district court essentially
applied the lodestar method in this case, and the deductions it made for
excessive hours were supported by the record.
|
