Opinion ID: 2314184
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Contemporaneousness and Reliability

Text: In this case, the plaintiffs' fee application is not supported by contemporaneous time records. Paragraph 10 of Ms. Schiff's Affidavit in Support of Plaintiffs' Petition for Costs, Expenses, and Attorneys' Fees represents that the summary submitted present[s] an accurate statement of services performed in connection with this litigation and was prepared from contemporaneous time records and, with respect to sums for costs and expenses, from accounting records. (Schiff Aff. 2/17/89 ¶ 10). However, that representation is flatly contradicted by the evidence. On cross-examination, Ms. Schiff acknowledged that the time records submitted by the plaintiffs included estimates of the hours she spent on this case and how much time was attributable to other services she performed for the Lodge in her capacity as its general counsel. She further acknowledged that those estimates were made long after the work had been performed. (Tr. 8/18/89 at 62-65). She also conceded that records regarding many of the hours claimed were reconstructed from slips of paper on which she made entries as long as three years after the services were performed. (Tr. 8/18/89 at 90-93). Moreover, she acknowledged that there were lags of six months in recording time that was entered directly into her permanent time records. (Tr. 8/18/89 at 97-98). This abject failure to satisfy the contemporaneousness requirement cannot be dismissed as a mere technicality because it appears to have contributed to patent inaccuracies in the documentation purportedly supporting the plaintiffs fee petition. For example, according to the records submitted, Ms. Schiff worked on this case for 25.7 hours on October 9, 1988, and 26.6 hours on October 10, 1988. While it may be possible to work around the clock for two consecutive days without respite, it clearly is impossible to do so for more than 24 hours in any one day. The summary also indicates that on April 14, 1988, Ms. Schiff spent 8.9 hours travelling to New York for a meeting. That was only two days after she wrote to the Court advising that she was unable to meet a filing deadline because of a totally incapacitating illness that would prevent her from engaging in normal activities for 7-10 days. Her incapacity was confirmed by another letter she sent to the Court on April 20 indicating that she had been hospitalized until April 19. Discrepancies of that nature cast serious doubt on the reliability of the plaintiffs' records and aptly illustrate why contemporaneous records are required. In this case, the plaintiffs have failed to satisfy that requirement.