Case docket
Agudath Israel of America v. Hochul — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 22-38
Agudath Israel of America v. Hochul — 2 court filings in the archive from U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed between April 13, 2022 and March 27, 2023.
See also: Agudath Israel of America v. Cuomo — U.S. District Court, E.D.N.Y. — the same docket (docket No. 1:20-cv-04834) under another case page, 37 public filings.
Case facts
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit |
|---|---|
| Filings | 2 public filings |
| Filed | 2022-04-13 – 2023-03-27 |
| Document types | memorandum or brief (1) |
| Original PDFs | 1 of 2 |
Case summary
This page holds the plaintiffs-appellants' brief in Second Circuit appeal No. 22-38 in Agudath Israel of America v. Hochul, from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, No. 1:20-cv-04834-KAM, and a Second Circuit summary order dated March 27, 2023. The underlying suit challenged New York Executive Order No. 202.68 of October 6, 2020, which imposed red, orange and yellow zone capacity limits on houses of worship. The appeal is from the district court's order of December 6, 2021 granting in part and denying in part the plaintiffs' motion for attorney's fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b). The brief asks the court of appeals to vacate that order and remand for an award of $921,862.50 in fees. The summary order on this page yields no extracted text.
Case at a glance
| Parties | Plaintiffs-appellants: Agudath Israel of America, Agudath Israel of Kew Garden Hills, Agudath Israel of Madison, Rabbi Yisroel Reisman and Steven Saphirstein; Agudath Israel of Bayswater and Rabbi Menachem Feifer are named as plaintiffs. Defendant-appellee: Kathy Hochul, Governor of the State of New York, in her official capacity |
|---|---|
| Court and docket | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 22-38, on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, No. 1:20-cv-04834-KAM (also styled 1:20-cv-04834-KAM-RML) |
| Program | Not named in the filings on this page. The underlying dispute concerns Executive Order No. 202.68 of October 6, 2020 and its capacity limits on houses of worship |
| Claims | On appeal: whether the district court abused its discretion in denying in part the motion for attorney's fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b), by applying a 10 percent reduction for work on the emergency motion for injunctive relief pending appeal and by awarding less than the highest in-district hourly rates and refusing a fees enhancement, and whether fees should be awarded for the appeal itself. The underlying claims were brought under the First Amendment |
| Disposition or status | The district court granted in part and denied in part the fees motion on December 6, 2021, and the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on January 5, 2022. The page carries a Second Circuit summary order dated March 27, 2023, but its extracted text is empty, so its holding cannot be stated from this page |
| Status checked | 2026-09-23 · against DOJ press releases through 2026-09-22; court docket not yet read |
What is the appeal about?
Attorney's fees. The brief states that the district court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' motion for attorney's fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) on December 6, 2021, that a notice of appeal was filed on January 5, 2022, and that the court of appeals has jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine.
What did the underlying executive order do?
The brief states that on October 6, 2020 the Governor issued Executive Order No. 202.68 restricting gatherings at houses of worship, classifying affected areas as red, orange or yellow zones. In the red zone houses of worship were restricted to 25 percent of maximum occupancy or ten people, whichever was fewer; in the orange zone to 33 percent of maximum occupancy or twenty-five people, whichever was fewer.
How much was sought?
The brief asks the court to vacate the fees order and remand for an award reflecting the highest in-district rates and a fees enhancement, of $921,862.50, comprising $748,732.50 for Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP and $173,130.00 for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty; in the alternative, at least $535,192.31, comprising $453,367.31 and $81,825.00, plus fees for the appeal.
Summary written from the documents on this page; every sentence is sourced.
Filings
2 public filings from this case, in filing-date order.
Court, dates and docket numbers are as recorded on the filings.