Fowler v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 41

Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu granting 37 Motion for Attorney Fees .(dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/29/2013)

Case4:12-cv-04869-DMR Document37-1 Filed06/24/13 Page1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – OAKLAND DIVISION

10
11 ALYSIA ANN FOWLER, an individual as
beneficiary for BEVERLY ANN HECTOR
12 TRUST,

[The Honorable Donna M. Ryu]

Plaintiff,

13
14

Case No.: 4:12-cv-04869-DMR

ORDER GRANTING WELLS FARGO’S
MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’
FEES [as modified]

vs.

15 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. as servicer and
successor-in-interest to WACHOVIA
16 CORPORATION for WORLD SAVINGS
BANK, FSB,
17
Defendants.
18

Date:
Time:
Ctrm:

August 8, 2013
11:00 a.m.
4

19
20
21

The motion of defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., successor by merger with Wells

22 Fargo Bank Southwest, N.A., f/k/a Wachovia Mortgage, FSB, f/k/a World Savings Bank, FSB
23 (erroneously sued as “Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as servicer and successor-in-interest to Wachovia
24 Corporation for World Savings Bank, FSB”) (“Wells Fargo”) for an order awarding attorneys’
is appropriate for decision without oral argument per Civil
--------------------------------------------------------fees came on regularly for hearing on August 8, 2013, at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4 of the
25
Local Rule 7-1(b). Plaintiff filed no opposition, and did not
----------------------------------------- respond to an order to
26 above-entitled Court, the Honorable Donna M. Ryu presiding.
show cause [Docket No. 39].
27

The Court, having read and considered the motion, the declaration of Leigh O. Curran,

28 the request for judicial notice, and all opposition and reply papers, finds that:
93000/FM0572/00601994-1

CASE NO.: 4:12-CV-04869-DMR
1

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES

Case4:12-cv-04869-DMR Document37-1 Filed06/24/13 Page2 of 3

Defendant Wells Fargo is the prevailing party pursuant to a judgment dismissing this

1

2 action with prejudice on June 17, 2013; [ see Christiansen v. Wells Fargo,
2013 WL 1832644 (N.D. Cal 2013), construing same contract clauses]
Based on the evidence submitted in support of its motion, Wells Fargo’s reasonable
3
[$7800 plus $790 for opening brief on fee
motion]
8590
4 attorneys’ fees are $_____. ACCORDINGLY,
5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

6

1.

Defendant Wells Fargo’s Request for Judicial Notice in support its fee motion is

7 granted;
2.

8

Defendant Wells Fargo is awarded attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party in the

8,590
9 amount of $______ against plaintiff Alysia A Fowler, as trustee for Beverly Ann Hector Trust.
10
11 Dated:

August 30
August 29
, 2013

12

HONORABLE DONNA M. RYU
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
93000/FM0572/00601994-1

CASE NO.: 4:12-CV-04869-DMR
2

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES