Lassiter v. Pinnacle Financial Group Incorporated

Filing 99

ORDER. ORDERED that the parties' Stipulated Motion For Entry Of Judgment In Favor Of The Plaintiff And Against The Defendant [Docket No. 97] is GRANTED. ORDERED that plaintiff shall be awarded thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00), which amount is inclusive of plaintiff's costs and reasonable attorney's fees. ORDERED that plaintiff Phebe Lassiter's Motion for Attorneys Fees and Expenses [Docket No. 79] and defendant Integrity Solution Services, Inc.'s Motion for Review of Taxation of Costs [Docket No. 85] are each DENIED as moot. ORDERED that the Bill of Costs filed by the Clerk of the Court [Docket No. 84] is VACATED by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 11/04/14. (jhawk, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Philip A. Brimmer Civil Action No. 13-cv-00268-PAB-MJW PHEBE LASSITER, Plaintiff, v. INTEGRITY SOLUTION SERVICES, INC., a Missouri corporation, formerly known as Pinnacle Financial Group Incorporated, a Minnesota corporation, Defendant. ORDER This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Stipulated Motion For Entry Of Judgment In Favor Of The Plaintiff And Against The Defendant [Docket No. 97]. The parties stipulate to an entry of judgment in favor of plaintiff Phebe Lassiter and against defendant Integrity Solution Services, Inc. in the amount of thirty thousand dollars, inclusive of plaintiff’s attorney’s fees and costs. On March 18, 2014, the Court granted plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment as to defendant’s liability for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. Docket No. 69. After the Court’s entry of partial summary judgment in plaintiff’s favor, the parties waived their right to a jury trial and agreed that the Court should determine an amount of statutory damages to be awarded to plaintiff. Docket No. 72. On May 15, 2014, the Court awarded plaintiff $150.00 in statutory damages. Docket No. 77. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff filed a motion for attorney’s fees and expenses seeking attorney’s fees in the amount of $35,750.00, plus post-judgment interest and any additional fees expended in seeking the award of attorney’s fees. Docket No. 79 at 9. On May 30, 2014, plaintiff submitted a proposed bill of costs, claiming that plaintiff’s costs totaled $3,885.26. Docket No. 80 at 1. On June 3, 2014, costs were taxed by the Clerk of the Court in the amount of $3,278.42. Docket No. 84. On June 10, 2014, def endant filed a motion for review of taxation of costs, which argued that plaintiff’s decision to take a video deposition was unnecessary and needlessly increased plaintiff’s costs. Docket No. 85 at 3-4. Defendant requested that plaintiff’s award of costs be reduced by $1,079.02, the costs associated with the videotaping of the deposition. Id. at 5. The stipulated motion seeks a final judgment against defendant in the amount of $30,000, as well as an order mooting plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees and defendant’s motion for review of costs. The Court finds this result to be reasonable in light of the agreed-upon amount and the risk that plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees will be reduced upon the Court’s review of the record. Wherefore, it is ORDERED that the parties’ Stipulated Motion For Entry Of Judgment In Favor Of The Plaintiff And Against The Defendant [Docket No. 97] is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that plaintiff shall be awarded thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00), which amount is inclusive of plaintiff’s costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. It is further 2 ORDERED that plaintiff Phebe Lassiter’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Expenses [Docket No. 79] and defendant Integrity Solution Services, Inc.’s Motion for Review of Taxation of Costs [Docket No. 85] are each DENIED as moot. It is further ORDERED that the Bill of Costs filed by the Clerk of the Court [Docket No. 84] is VACATED. DATED November 4, 2014. BY THE COURT: s/Philip A. Brimmer PHILIP A. BRIMMER United States District Judge 3

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?