Fee Recovery For Paralegal Work: Orange County Lawyer Article Surveys Some Federal Decisions Where Paralegal Compensation Was Successfully Opposed Or Limited In Recovery

Proof of Paralegal Status and Compliance with Education/Certification Requirements Are Musts.

     In our June 4, 2008 post, we discussed federal and state decisions that generally allowed paralegal time to be compensated under the EAJA or many California fee-shifting statutes. An interesting article, authored by Kirstin Simonson, has appeared in the November 2008 issue of the Orange County Lawyer. We briefly review the article—"Paralegal Requirements and Fee Recovery”—found at pages 42-45 of the November 2008 edition.

     In California, paralegals must meet certain educational and certification requirements, including continuing education requirements, pursuant to Business and Professions Code sections 6450-6456. Although this legislation did not create a governing body for the paralegal profession, courts are patrolling violations through scrutiny of fee petitions seeking reimbursement for paralegal work.

     Ms. Simonson, in her article, surveys three federal decisions involving claims brought under the American with Disabilities Act or the Unruh Civil Rights Act. In the first case, Sanford v. GMRI, Inc., Civ. No. S-04-1535 (E.D.Cal. Nov. 14, 2005), plaintiff was denied compensation for several so-called "paralegals" because they did not have the qualifications required by Business and Professions Code section 6450. Instead, the federal judge classified them as "legal assistants" and substantially reduced the fee award requested based on their work. The same federal judge, in a follow-up second case (White v. GMRI, Inc., Civ. No. S-04-0620 (E.D.Cal. April 12, 2006), denied a motion for reconsideration denying all fees to a so-called paralegal because the plaintiff did not provide a written declaration from a supervising attorney attesting about the person’s qualifications under section 6450(c)(4). In the third case, Martinez v. G. Maroni Co., Civ. No. S-06-1399 (E.D.Cal. May 2, 2007), a federal court found the paralegals duly qualified but reduced requested fees for copying, faxing, and mailing documents based on finding these tasks were more appropriately handled by a secretary.

     Mr. Simonson concludes with this synopsis of the lessons contained in the three surveyed federal cases: "Make sure that anyone who is hired for a paralegal position has met the education and experience requirements of section 6450(c). Keep on file copies of the paralegal’s certificate, diploma or transcript, and the written supervising attorney declaration where relevant; and verify the paralegal’s MCLE compliance and keep records of certifications of completed MCLE hours. Then you will be ready to respond if your paralegal’s qualifications are questioned."

Scroll to Top