Carrizosa et al v. Stassinos et al

Filing 324

ORDER by Judge Whyte granting 315 Motion for Attorney Fees (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/3/2011)

1
2
3
4

E-FILED on 5/3/2011

5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13

RICHARD CARRIZOSA and MARY PEA, on
behalf of themselves and others similarly
situated,

14
15

Plaintiffs,
v.

16

LEGAL RECOVERY SERVICES, et al.,

17

No. 05-CV-02280 RMW

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION
FOR REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES
AND COSTS

Defendant.

[Re Docket No. 315]

18
19

Plaintiffs Richard Carrizosa and Mary Pea have moved for an award of reasonable attorneys'

20

fees in the amount of $240,650.40 and costs in the amount of $18,739.69, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §

21

1692k(a)(3) and Cal. Code Civil Proc. § 1021.5, for obtaining the judgment entered against

22

defendants on October 29, 2010. The court has examined the declarations of plaintiffs' counsel

23

submitted in support of the motion, the declaration of Richard M. Pearl, regarding the reasonable

24

hourly rate for the services provided, and the history of this litigation before the court. The court

25

finds that the motion should be granted for the reasons described below.

26

Plaintiffs won judgment on claims brought under the Fair Debt Collection Prices Act, which

27

provides that any debt collector who fails to comply with the FDCPA is liable "in the case of any

28

successful action . . . [for] the costs of the action, together with a reasonable attorney's fee as
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS—No. 05-CV-02280 RMW
MEC

1

determined by the court." 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3).

Plaintiffs also won judgment on claims

2

brought under California's Unfair Competition Law. Under California's private attorney general

3

statute, Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1021.5, plaintiffs would also be entitled to recover attorneys' fees if

4

(1) their action resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest; (2) a

5

significant benefit was conferred on the general public or a large class of persons; and (3) the need

6

for and burden of private enforcement was such as to make the award appropriate. See In re Head,

7

42 Cal. 3d 223 (1986). Plaintiffs are also entitled to attorneys' fees pursuant to California's Unfair

8

Competition Law because the action resulted in the enforcement of a law that protected consumers

9

from excessive fees, which affects the public interest; because the litigation resulting in a significant

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

benefit to a large class of persons who were sent deceptive collection letters or threatened with

11

excessive fees; and because the financial burden of enforcement was out of proportion to the

12

personal financial stake–less than $3 in interest payments and a possible $1000 statutory damages

13

award–of the two plaintiffs who sought to enforce the law.

14
15

The court finds that the hourly rates as set forth below for work on this case are reasonable
and are similar to rates awarded to these attorneys in similar litigation in this district.

16

Attorney

Hourly Rate

17

O. Randolph Bragg

$480

18

Paul Arons

$465

19

Ronald Wilcox

$350

20

Shannon Carter (paralegal)

$120

Carmel Payne (paralegal)

$90

Marion Ramel (paralegal)

$90

21
22
23
24
25
26
27

The court also finds that plaintiffs' counsel reasonably incurred the time set forth below in
seeking class certification, conducting discovery, and filing and defending summary judgment
motions. The time claimed has been discounted by eliminating all time spent solely on claims
against defendants who were dismissed and further reduced by 20% to eliminate duplicative time or
time spent on claims that were not resolved.

28
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS—No. 05-CV-02280 RMW
MEC
2

1

Attorney

Hourly Rate

2

O. Randolph Bragg

25.36

3

Paul Arons

470.04

4

Ronald Wilcox

21.12

5

Shannon Carter (paralegal)

1.1

Carmel Payne (paralegal)

11.2

Marion Ramel (paralegal)

15.2

6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Applying the lodestar method, the court finds that reasonable attorneys' fees in the amount of
$240,650.40 and costs of $18, 739.69 should be awarded for a total award of $259,390.09.
Plaintiffs' motion is granted.

11
12
13

DATED:

5/2/2011
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS—No. 05-CV-02280 RMW
MEC
3