Naqvi v. Illinois Health and Science, et al
Filing
86
OPINION entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Defendants' Petition for an Award of Attorneys' Fees 82 ALLOWED in part. See written order. (LB, ilcd)
E-FILED
Tuesday, 27 August, 2019 09:56:57 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
ALI NAQVI,
Plaintiff,
v.
ILLINOIS HEALTH
AND SCIENCE, an Illinois
not-for-profit corporation, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 17-cv-3145
OPINION
TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE:
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Petition for an
Award of Attorneys’ Fees (d/e 82) (Fee Petition). This Court awarded
Defendants’ attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing the Defendants’ Motion to
Compel Plaintiff to Provide Initial Disclosures Under Rule 26(A), Answer
Defendants’ Interrogatories and Produce Documents Responsive to
Defendants’ Discovery Requests (d/e 72) (Motion to Compel). Opinion
entered July 10, 2019 (d/e 78), at 2-4. Defendants have submitted their
Fee Petition and Plaintiff has responded (d/e 85).
Defendants seek $3,443.10 in fees for bringing the Motion to Compel,
and $1,557.30 for preparing the fee petition. Attorney Daniel J. Delaney, a
partner in the law firm representing Defendants, spent 1.4 hours in
Page 1 of 4
connection with preparing the Motion to Compel; Partner attorney Laurie
Holmes spent .7 hours in connection with preparing the Motion to Compel;
and Associate attorney Christian Chapin spent 5.8 hours in connection with
preparing the Motion to Compel. Defendants state that Delaney’s rate is
$669.00 per hour, Holmes’ rate is $573.00 per hour, and Chapin’s rate is
$363.00 per hour.
This Court must determine the appropriate award of reasonable
attorney fees. The Court must consider both the reasonableness of the
hours expended and the reasonableness of the hourly rates. Spegon v.
Catholic Bishop of Chicago, 175 F.3d 544, 553-54 (7th Cir. 1999). Plaintiff
objects to awarding fees for Partner Holmes’ time of .7 hours. Plaintiff
argues that billing time for two partners on a motion to compel is
unnecessary and Holmes’ time was duplicative. The Court agrees.
Associate Chapin spent the lion’s share of the time drafting the Motion to
Compel. The use of two partners to review that work was duplicative. The
Court will disallow the .7 hours billed by Holmes in the award of fees.
Plaintiff also objects to the hourly rates of Delaney and Chapin. The
reasonable rate is the rate lawyers of similar ability and experience in the
community normally charge their paying clients for the type of work in
question. Spegon v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago, 175 F.3d at 555. Plaintiff
Page 2 of 4
objects to the hourly rates of Defendants’ attorneys. The Court agrees that
the rates are excessive for lawyers who practice in Central Illinois in this
District for this type of work. Plaintiff’s counsel states that in her experience
in this District, rates of $500.00 per hour and $300.00 per hour respectively
for attorneys Delaney and Chapin, are on the higher side of reasonable but
not objectionable in this case. The Court questions whether hourly rates of
$500.00 and $300.00 are also more than amounts similar attorneys charge
in this District for this type of work. The Court, however, will not lower the
rates below those Plaintiff suggests are high but reasonable. The Court,
therefore, awards fees in the amount of $2,440.00 representation provided
in connection with preparing the Motion to Compel.
The Court may, in its discretion, award fees for preparation of the fee
petition (preparation fees). Spegon, 175 F.3d at 554. The fee request for
preparing the fee petition, however, should be reasonable in relation to the
merits of the fee request. The Spegon Court stated that preparation fees
that equaled 15 minutes for every hour (or 1/4th) of fees sought in the
petition was excessive. Id. (citing Ustrak v. Fairman, 851 F.2d 983, 988 (7th
Cir. 1988)). Here, Defendants’ counsel spent 3.7 hours to prepare a
petition seeking to recover fees for 7.2 hours work, or more than 30
minutes for each hour in fees sought by the Fee Petition. The request for
Page 3 of 4
preparation fees is clearly excessive. In light of the teaching in Spegon, the
Court will allow preparation fees in the amount equal to 10 minutes for
every hour (or 1/6th) of the time spent incurring the allowed fees. The Court
allowed attorney Delaney 1.4 hours for fees incurred in connection with the
Motion to Compel, and so, allows him .23 hours for preparation fees (1.4 /
6), or $115.00 (.23 X $500). The Court allowed attorney Chapin 5.8 hours
in fees incurred in connection with the Motion to Compel, and so, allows
her .97 hours for preparation fees (5.8 / 6), or $291.00 (.97 x $300). The
Court, therefore, allows $406.00 in fees to prepare the Fee Petition. The
Court awards the total sum of $2,846.00 in attorney fees to Defendants.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Petition for an
Award of Attorneys’ Fees (d/e 82) is ALLOWED in part. The Court orders
Plaintiff Ali Naqvi to pay Defendants the sum of $2,846.00 for fees incurred
in connection with the Defendants’ Motion to Compel (d/e 72), pursuant to
this Court’s Opinion entered July 10, 2019 (d/e 78). Plaintiff Naqvi shall
pay the $2,846.00 to Defendants on or before October 1, 2019.
ENTER: August 27, 2019
s/ Tom Schanzle-Haskins
TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 4 of 4
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?