Soares v. Lorono et al
Filing
370
ORDER re 342 First MOTION for Attorney Fees. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 03/12/2015. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/12/2015)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
PAUL F. SOARES,
Case No. 12-cv-05979-WHO
Plaintiff,
8
ORDER RE: ATTORNEYS’ FEES
v.
9
10
JEFFREY LORONO, et al.,
Re: Dkt. No. 342
Defendants.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
This consolidated case consists of two proceedings. First, Paul F. Soares brought a civil
13
proceeding in this Court against Jeffrey Lorono, Lisa Lorono, Salinas Valley Roofing
14
Incorporated (“SVR”), Adolfo Rangel, and Village Heating and Sheet Metal (“Village”)
15
(collectively, “defendants”) for breach of contract, breach of warranty, and fraud. Memorandum
16
Opinion (“Opinion”) at 1-2 (Dkt. No. 335). Second, SVR and Village brought an adversary
17
complaint against Soares in bankruptcy court, seeking non-dischargeability of Soares’s debt to
18
them. Id. I heard both matters in a bench trial on December 8, 2014, and issued judgment in favor
19
of the defendants in both the civil and adversary proceedings. Id. at 2-3.
20
Pursuant to my opinion, SVR moves for attorneys’ fees in the amount of $328,960.00 “for
21
fees incurred in Pre-Petition and Post-Petition claims and litigation.” Dkt. No. 342 at 1. The
22
motion for attorneys’ fees is currently scheduled for hearing on March 25, 2015. I find this matter
23
appropriate for resolution without oral argument and VACATE the hearing. CIV. L.R. 7-1(b).
24
That said, I am confused by the pending motion. David Hollingsworth represented the
25
defendants in both proceedings. Exhibit A to the attorneys’ fees motion details Hollingsworth’s
26
work in connection with his representation of SVR. Dkt. No. 343-1. However, it also reflects the
27
work done for the other defendants in this case, and does not differentiate between hours billed
28
done on behalf of the different clients. Nor does it separate billings related to the civil proceeding
1
2
from those related to the bankruptcy proceeding.
Under the rules of bankruptcy, attorneys’ fees are typically awarded where an underlying
3
contract has an attorneys’ fees provision. See Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of Am. v. Pac. Gas &
4
Elec. Co., 549 U.S. 443, 443 (2007). In this case, the only contracts at issue involved SVR and
5
Village. The Settlement Agreement between Soares and SVR included an attorneys’ fees
6
provision. The contract with Village was oral and there is no evidence that the agreement
7
contemplated attorneys’ fees.
8
SVR has indicated only that it is entitled to fees relating to its enforcement of the
9
Settlement Agreement in state court and in bankruptcy court. It has not requested fees related to
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
the defense of the civil proceeding brought by Soares in this Court.
In order to obtain attorneys’ fees, SVR must file billing records that reflect only the work
12
done on behalf of SVR, separate from the other defendants in this case. It must do so within 7
13
days of this order. In addition, the records must differentiate between work related to the
14
adversary proceeding and work related to the civil proceeding. SVR’s billings from the
15
bankruptcy proceeding should also indicate which fees accrued before the petition in the
16
bankruptcy court, and which fees accrued post-petition.
17
If SVR believes that it is entitled to attorneys’ fees related to its defense of the civil
18
proceeding, or if any other defendants wish to request attorneys’ fees, each must submit a
19
declaration of no more than 5 pages indicating the basis for such fees within 7 days of this order.
20
Each defendant should also submit separate billing records at the same time.
21
Defendants also seek exemplary damages, presumably related only to the bankruptcy
22
proceeding, but have not specified the legal basis for these damages. Dkt. No. 342 at 2. They
23
must submit a declaration describing the basis for exemplary damages within 7 days of this order.
24
25
26
27
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 12, 2015
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?