In this case, plaintiffs requested expert witness fees for an actuarial witness. Cohen v. Jaffe, Raitt, Heuer, No. 2:16-cv-11484, 2017 WL 3616485 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 23, 2017). The court was inquired to determine whether the fees requested for the expert’s services were reasonable. Id. The court described the fee requested as “eye popping” and established an appropriate rate for an actuarial as it found the requested rate was too high. Id. The plaintiffs did not supply any evidence regarding market rates for actuarial experts, so the resources available to the court to determine an appropriate hourly rate were limited. Id. The plaintiff’s expert charged $715 an hour for his services, and the defendants provided evidence that their actuarial expert charged $295 per hour. Id. Given the vast difference, the court found the plaintiff’s expert’s fees to be unreasonable. Id. Additionally, because no other market evidence was provided to the court, it used the defendant’s expert’s hourly rate to establish the appropriate rate for the plaintiff’s expert and ordered that instead of $715 an hour, the plaintiff’s expert would be compensated at a rate of $295 per hour. Id.
