Parrish v. Solis et al

Filing 282

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT. Signed by Judge Lucy Koh on 12/30/2014. (lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/30/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

KAHEAL PARRISH,

12

Plaintiff,
v.

13
14

A. SOLIS, et al.,
Defendants.

15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 11-CV-01438-LHK
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT

16
17

On December 12, 2014, pro bono counsel for Plaintiff Kaheal Parrish (“Counsel”)

18

requested reimbursement for costs incurred as a result of Counsel’s pro bono representation of Mr.

19

Parrish, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(c)(1) and the Court’s Federal Pro Bono Project Guidelines

20

(“Guidelines”). The Guidelines and the Court’s General Order No. 25 permit reimbursement of

21

costs incurred by pro bono counsel that the court determines are reasonable and necessary, up to a

22

maximum of $15,000. See, e.g., General Order No. 25.1 Here, Counsel requests reimbursement for

23

$16,626.51. In addition, General Order No. 25 requires that pro bono counsel seek the trial judge’s

24

approval prior to incurring a single expense of at least $1,000. See id. Counsel did not do so here.

25

Nevertheless, the Court has considered the entirety of Counsel’s request for reimbursement, and

26

finds that Counsel’s expenses were reasonable and necessary, except as noted below.

27
28

Counsel requests reimbursement of $709.17 in lodging and meal expenses for James Esten,
1

Available at http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/generalorders.
1

Case No.: 11-CV-01438-LHK
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT

1

an expert witness. Counsel did not provide invoices in support of these expenses. Counsel also

2

requests reimbursement of $40 in bell charges for Mr. Esten. Counsel similarly did not provide

3

invoices in support of this expense. Accordingly, the Court denies Counsel’s request for

4

reimbursement of $749.17 in connection with Mr. Esten’s travel expenses.

5

Counsel also requests reimbursement for Mr. Esten spending two hours and fifteen minutes

6

to “[d]ownload all e-mail correspondence re[:] Parrish case.” At Mr. Esten’s hourly rate of $175,

7

this resulted in a charge of $393.75. The Court finds that this expense is not reasonable, and

8

therefore denies Counsel’s request for reimbursement of $393.75.
In addition, Counsel requests reimbursement for Mr. Esten spending twenty-seven hours to

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

9

“[r]eview multiple deposition transcripts”; “[h]ighlight important sections, make notations by page

11

and line for future use at deposition and/or trial”; “[r]esearch areas of concern”; and “organize

12

materials for use at my deposition.” This resulted in a total charge of $4,725. The Court finds that

13

twenty-seven hours is not a reasonable amount of time for Mr. Esten to bill for these tasks. Based

14

on the description of activities supplied in Mr. Esten’s invoice, the Court finds that twenty-four

15

hours, i.e. three hours less than Mr. Esten billed, is a reasonable amount of time to spend on these

16

tasks. Accordingly, the Court reduces Counsel’s request for reimbursement by $525.

17

Finally, Counsel requests reimbursement for $30.62 in postage for mailings to Beth

18

Quintana, Laurie Small, and Charles Austin Lyons. Counsel’s invoice does not detail why these

19

individuals are connected to Counsel’s pro bono representation. Accordingly, the Court denies

20

Counsel’s request for reimbursement of $30.62 in postage.

21
22

In summary, the Court denies Counsel’s request for reimbursement of $1,698.54 in costs.
Counsel’s request for reimbursement, now reduced to $14,927.97, is otherwise approved.

23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

Dated: December 30, 2014

_______________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

27
28
2

Case No.: 11-CV-01438-LHK
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT