Dickerson Enterprises Inc et al v. MRPI Corporation et al

Filing 13

AMENDED 11 ORDER re 8 Order granting 4 MOTION to Remand, Fees and Costs and 10 Court Ordered Supplement filed by Stacy D Dickerson, John Dickerson, Dickerson Enterprises Inc, Dickerson Enterprises Inc ESOP. Plaintiffs awarded attorneys fees and costs against defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $2560.25. Signed by Judge Mark W Bennett on 6/6/13. (copy w/nef mailed to non-ecf filers; certified copy of order mailed to Eighteenth Judicial District, District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas) (djs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CENTRAL DIVISION

DICKERSON ENTERPRISES, INC.,
DICKERSON ENTERPRISES, INC.,
ESOP, JOHN DICKERSON, M.D. and
STACY D. DICKERSON,
Plaintiffs,

No. C 12-3025-MWB

vs.

AMENDED ORDER REGARDING
PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR FEES
AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH
MOTION TO REMAND

M.R.P.I. CORPORATION, MARK
ELDRIDGE and RETURN ON LIFE,
L.L.P.,
Defendants.

____________________

On July 31, 2012, I granted plaintiffs Dickerson Enterprises, Inc., Dickerson
Enterprises, Inc., ESOP, John Dickerson, and Stacy D. Dickerson’s Motion for Remand,
Fees and Costs, and remanded this case to the Eighteenth Judicial District, District Court
for Sedgwick County, Kansas. In doing so, I granted Plaintiffs’ request for just costs and
1

attorney fees and set a briefing schedule. On August 13, 2012, plaintiffs filed affidavits

1

Although the case was remanded, I retained jurisdiction over the collateral issue
of attorney fees and costs under § 1447(c) for improper removal. See Bryant v. Britt, 420
F.3d 161, 165 (2d Cir. 2005) (holding that “a district court has jurisdiction to resolve a
motion for fees and costs under § 1447(c) after a remand order has issued.”); see also
Wisconsin v. Hotline Indus., Inc., 236 F.3d 363, 364 (7th Cir. 2000) (same); Stallworth
v. Greater Cleveland Reg’l Transit Auth., 105 F.3d 252, 257 (6th Cir. 1997) (same); Mints
v. Educational Testing Serv., 99 F.3d 1253, 1258–59 (3d Cir. 1996) (same); Moore v.
Permanente Med. Group, 981 F.2d 443, 445 (9th Cir. 1992) (same).

and supporting materials in support of their requested amount of costs, including attorney
fees, that they claim were expended in connection with their motion to remand.
Defendants have not filed a timely response.
Plaintiffs request $3,263.25 in attorney fees and costs. In support of their request,
plaintiffs have offered affidavits from both their Kansas and local counsel concerning the
work they performed on plaintiffs’ remand motion. Defendants have not disputed either
plaintiffs’ counsels’ hourly rates or the amount of time claimed.

I have examined

counsels’ affidavits, which set out in sufficient detail the work performed, the time spent,
and the costs incurred as a result of defendants’ removal. I find that the rates charged by
plaintiffs’ counsel are reasonable and consistent with the fees for similar services in this
legal market. I also find, with one exception, that all the work detailed in the affidavits
was necessary and the time spent reasonable. However, I conclude 5.20 hours for drafting
the remand motion excessive and reduce the time for that project to 1.5 hours.
Accordingly, I reduce plaintiffs’ attorney fees request by $703. Therefore, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1447(c), I award plaintiffs’ attorney fees and costs against defendants, jointly
and severally, in the amount of $2560.25.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 6th day of June, 2013.

__________________________________
MARK W. BENNETT
U. S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

2