## Facts

- L.H., a student with Down syndrome, was educated in a mainstream public-school classroom with supports through second grade.
- The Hamilton County Department of Education (HCDE) proposed moving L.H. to a segregated Comprehensive Development Classroom (CDC) using a specialized curriculum rather than the general education standards.
- L.H.’s parents objected to the 2013–14 IEP placement change and unilaterally enrolled him in the Montessori School of Chattanooga (TMS), also paying for a full-time aide.
- The parents pursued administrative and federal IDEA proceedings, alleging denial of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE) and seeking reimbursement.
- The Sixth Circuit held the CDC placement violated IDEA’s LRE requirement and that TMS was an appropriate private placement warranting reimbursement; the case returned to the district court for reimbursement and then fees.
- After reimbursement was awarded on remand, L.H. and his parents moved for attorney’s fees and costs under IDEA, seeking a lodestar award plus an upward adjustment.

## Issues

1. Whether L.H. and his parents qualified as prevailing parties entitled to attorney’s fees and costs under IDEA.
2. What hours and hourly rates were reasonable under the lodestar method for this multi-year IDEA dispute.
3. Whether an upward enhancement to the lodestar was warranted based on results obtained, complexity, duration, and risk of nonpayment.
4. What litigation costs and expenses were reasonable and recoverable.

## Decision

- The court held plaintiffs were prevailing parties because they obtained substantive and monetary relief that materially altered the parties’ legal relationship.
- The court applied the lodestar method, awarding fees and costs in substantial part while reducing amounts for billing entries that were excessive, duplicative, or inadequately documented.
- The court accepted most requested hourly rates as consistent with community rates for comparable special-education litigation.
- The court declined to award the full enhancement requested, finding the lodestar adequately compensated counsel and that enhancements are reserved for rare, exceptional circumstances.
- The court allowed reasonable and necessary costs and disallowed expenses insufficiently substantiated or inadequately tied to the litigation.

## Legal Principles

- Under IDEA, a court may award reasonable attorney’s fees as part of the costs to a prevailing parent of a child with a disability. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(B).
- Fee rates must reflect prevailing community rates for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience, and reputation. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(C).
- Reasonable fees are calculated using the lodestar method (reasonable hours multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate), with potential adjustments informed by factors such as time, difficulty, skill, and results obtained.
- A party prevails by obtaining relief that materially changes the legal relationship between the parties.
- Lodestar enhancements are disfavored and permitted only in rare, exceptional cases where the lodestar does not account for the relevant considerations.

## Conclusion

The district court awarded L.H. and his parents substantial attorney’s fees and costs under IDEA as prevailing parties, using the lodestar method, making targeted reductions for unreasonable billing, and largely rejecting an upward enhancement because the lodestar sufficiently reflected the work performed and success achieved.


L.H. v. Hamilton Cnty. Dep’t of Educ., 356 F. Supp. 3d 713 (E.D. Tenn. 2019)