Grochocinski v. Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw LLP et al

Filing 249

PETITION by Defendants for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Ciszewski, Steven)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION DAVID GROCHOCINSKI, not individually, but solely in his capacity as the Chapter 7 Trustee for the bankruptcy estate of CMGT, INC., Plaintiff, v. MAYER BROWN ROWE & MAW LLP and RONALD B. GIVEN, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 06 C 5486 Judge Virginia M. Kendall DEFENDANTS’ PETITION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS Pursuant to the Court’s Order dated June 30, 2011 (the “June 30 Order”), Defendants Mayer Brown LLP (formerly known as Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw LLP) and Ronald P. Given (together, “Defendants”), by their attorneys, Novack and Macey LLP (“Novack and Macey”), hereby submit their petition for attorneys’ fees and costs to be paid by Edward T. Joyce & Associates (“Joyce”). In support hereof, Defendants state as follows: PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On March 31, 2010, the Court granted Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Their Unclean Hands Defenses. (Dkt. 170-171.) 2. Thereafter, on April 29, 2010, Defendants filed their Sanctions Motion seeking sanctions against Plaintiff and Joyce (the “Sanctions Motion”). (Dkt. 176-177.) 3. On June 30, 2011, the Court granted Defendants’ Sanctions Motion, in part, as to Joyce. (Dkt. 246-247.) Specifically, the June 30 Order requires Joyce to pay: (a) one-half of the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by Defendants in preparing for and taking Plaintiff’s deposition (the “Deposition”); (b) one-half of the costs incurred by Defendants in connection with the Deposition; and (c) one-half of the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by Defendants in bringing the Sanctions Motion. DEFENDANTS’ ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 4. The awarded fees and costs Defendants seek are set forth in detail in the Affidavit by Certification of Steven J. Ciszewski (“Ciszewski Aff. ¶__”), attached hereto as Exhibit A. As set forth fully therein, Defendants should be awarded fees and costs totaling $37,135.82, as follows: Fees related to the Deposition Costs related to the Deposition Fees related to the Sanctions Motion TOTAL 5. $10,712.34 $1,438.58 $24,984.90 $37,135.82 The hourly rates charged by Novack and Macey in connection with the Deposition and Sanctions Motion are consistent with the rates regularly charged (and collected) by Novack and Macey in legal malpractice actions. These rates are fair and reasonable and within the normal standards of the Chicago legal community for the type of services provided. (Ciszewski Aff. ¶¶6-8.) 6. Moreover, the time spent on the Deposition and Sanctions Motion was reasonable and necessary under the circumstances. (Id. ¶11.) WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that the Court: A. Enter an order granting this Fee Petition; B. Order Joyce to reimburse Defendants $37,135.82 for attorneys’ fees and costs and enter final judgment against Joyce and in favor of Defendants in that amount; and C. Grant Defendants such other and further relief as is appropriate. 2 Respectfully submitted, MAYER BROWN LLP and RONALD B. GIVEN By: Stephen Novack Mitchell L. Marinello Steven J. Ciszewski NOVACK AND MACEY LLP 100 N. Riverside Plaza Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 419-6900 Doc. #441977 3 /s/ Steven J. Ciszewski One Of Their Attorneys CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Steven J. Ciszewski, an attorney, hereby certifies that he caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Defendants’ Petition for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs to be served through the ECF system upon the following: Edward T. Joyce Arthur W. Aufmann Robert D. Carroll Edward T. Joyce & Assoc., P.C. 11 S. LaSalle St. Chicago, IL 60603 David Morgans Myers & Miller, LLC 30 N. LaSalle St., Suite 2200 Chicago, IL 60602 and by Federal Express overnight service, upon the following: Gerard Spehar 1625 Grandview Avenue Glendale, CA 91201 on this 8th day of July, 2011. /s/ Steven J. Ciszewski

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?