Jones et al v. Board of Supervisors of the University of Louisiana System et al
Filing
143
ORDER & REASONS: ORDERED that 120 Motion to Release Attorneys Fees and Costs from the Registry of the Court is GRANTED. Angela Jones, et al is awarded reasonable attorneys fees and costs in the amount of $32,695.00 to be paid to movant from the courts registry no later than twenty-one (21) days from the signing of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen Wells Roby. (cc: FinUnit) (cml)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ANGELA JONES, ET AL
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NO:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA SYSTEM, ET AL
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE
JUDGE KAREN WELLS ROBY
14-2304
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a Motion to Release Attorneys’ Fees and Costs from the Registry of
the Court. Plaintiff, Angela Jones, (“Jones”) is moving for this Court to release attorneys’ fees
and costs from the registry of the court pursuant to Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct,
“advocating prompt distribution of all portions of property as to which the interests are not in
dispute.” R. Doc. 120. This instant motion was opposed. R. Doc. 121. The Plaintiff has asked for
the release of $30,000 in attorneys’ fees and $2,695 in costs. R. Doc. 139.
I.
Background
On October 7, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against all defendants, Board of
Supervisors of the University of Louisiana System, Michael Prescott, Kevin Knudsen, Kevin
Brady, Carmen Bray, and Mike McGill. The Plaintiff alleged that she was discriminated against
based on race and gender pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964. Additionally, this
action arises under 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8) and 42 U.S.C. § (3). R. Doc. 1.
On March 22, 2016, the Plaintiff Angela Jones and Defendants to this suit had a settlement
conference and successfully reached an agreement. R. Doc. 115. On May 12, 2016, the Court
ordered that the proceeds be deposited into the registry of the court. Pursuant to the court order,
Defendants have deposited the settlement proceeds in the amount of $75,000.00 into the registry
of the court. R. Doc. 125. At this time, the Plaintiff seeks the release of fees and costs from the
Registry of Court to pay her attorneys.
II.
Standard of Review
The Supreme Court has specified that the “lodestar” calculation is the “most useful starting
point” for determining the award for attorney’s fees. Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433
(1983). Lodestar is computed by “… the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation
multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate.” Id. The lodestar calculation, “...provides an objective basis
on which to make an initial estimate of the value of a lawyer’s services.” Id. Once the lodestar has
been determined, the district court must consider the weight and applicability of the twelve factors
delineated in Johnson. See Watkins v. Forcide, 7 F.3d 453, 457 (5th Cir. 1993). 1 Subsequently, if
the Johnson factors warrant an adjustment, the court may make modifications upward or
downward to the lodestar. Id. However, the lodestar is presumed to be a reasonable calculation
and should be modified only in exceptional circumstances. Id. (citing City of Burlington v. Dague,
505 U.S. 557, 562 (1992)).
The party seeking attorney’s fees bears the burden of establishing the reasonableness of the
fees by submitting “adequate documentation of the hours reasonably expended”, and
demonstrating the use of billing judgement. Creecy v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 548 F. Supp.
2d 279, 286 (E.D. La. 2008) (citing Wegner v. Standard Ins. Co., 129 F.3d 814, 822 (5th
Cir.1997)).
1
The twelve Johnson factors are (1) the time and labor involved; (2) the novelty and difficulty of the
questions; (3) the skill required to perform the legal services properly; (4) the preclusion of other employment by the
attorney due to this case; (5) the customary fee; (6) whether fee is fixed or contingent; (7) time limitations; (8) the
amount involved and results obtained; (9) the experience, reputation and ability of counsel; (10) the “undesirability”
of the case; (11) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client; and (12) awards in similar cases.
See Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 488 F.2d 714, 717-719 (5th Cir. 1974).
2
III.
Reasonable Hourly Rate
As proof of reasonableness of rates charged, the Plaintiff submitted affidavits of attorneys
Elton Heron (“Heron”) and Joel G. Porter (“Porter”). The affidavits provided confirmed the
reasonableness of the time requested and hourly rate charged for the aforementioned attorneys. R.
Doc. 139-1 (discussing qualifications and experience of Elton Heron); R. Doc. 139-2 (discussing
qualifications and experience of Joel Porter). The Plaintiff also provided an itemized explanation
of the two attorneys’ rates and fee charged in the affidavit. R. Doc. 139, p. 1-8.
In the instant case, the Defendant has not argued that the hourly rates charged are
unreasonable R. Doc. 121. Therefore, it is prima facie reasonable. Powell v. C.I.R., 891 F.2d 1167,
1173 (5th Cir. 1990) (quoting Islamic Ctr. of Mississippi v. City of Starkville, 876 F.2d 468, 469
(5th Cir. 1989)). Since the hourly rate is not in dispute, the rate of $94.50 an hour for attorneys
Heron and Porter is presumed reasonable. Moreover, this rate is a reduced rate from the attorneys’
normal rate of $175.00, R. Doc. 139, p.7, and the Plaintiff has provided an affidavit of a similar
case where the hourly rate was $200.00 for an attorney with similar experience. R. Doc. 139-3, p.
1. Plaintiff has also filed a separate affidavit stating that Porter could charge $200.00 per hour
given his knowledge and experience. R. Doc. 139-4.
IV.
Hours Reasonably Spent on Litigation
Next, the court must determine whether 317.5 hours of time were reasonably expended on
the litigation. The party seeking the fee bears the burden of documenting and supporting the
reasonableness of all time expenditures that compensation is sought. Henseley, 461 U.S. at 437.
The “[c]ounsel for the prevailing party should make a good faith effort to exclude from the fee
request hours that are excessive, redundant, and otherwise unnecessary…” Id. at 434. Hours that
are not properly billed to one’s client also are not properly billed to one’s adversary. Hensley, 461
3
U.S. at 434. The Supreme Court calls on fee applicants to make request that demonstrate “billing
judgment”. Id. at 437. The remedy for failing to exercise “billing judgment” is to exclude hours
that were not reasonably expended. See Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434.
Heron and Porter submitted an itemized transaction listing legal services rendered. R. Doc.
139, p. 1-7. According to the transaction listing, Heron and Porter spent a combined 317.5 hours,
at the hourly rate of $94.50, on work done on this instant case. Id. For this time and this rate, the
Plaintiff’s attorneys have asked for $30,000. 2 The Court finds that the time allocated for the various
legal services rendered for the instant case is reasonable. Moreover, the Plaintiff’s attorneys appear
to have exhibited billing judgment in not listing hours for which they did not have sufficient
documentation. R. Doc. 139, p. 1. Thus, the Court finds total amount of $30,000.00 to be
reasonable.
V.
Adjusting the Lodestar
After the lodestar is determined, the Court may then adjust the lodestar upward or
downward depending on the twelve factors set forth in Johnson, 488 F.2d at 717-19. However,
“the Supreme Court has limited greatly the use of the second, third, eighth, and ninth factors for
enhancement purposes, and accordingly, the Fifth Circuit has held that ‘[e]nhancements based
upon these factors are only appropriate in rare cases supported by specific evidence in the record
and detailed findings by the courts.’” Wells Fargo Equip. Fin., Inc. v. Beaver Const., LLC, No.
CIV. 6:10-0386, 2011 WL 5525999, at *3 (W.D. La. Oct. 18, 2011) (citing Walker v. U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 99 F.3d 761, 771–72 (5th Cir. 1996)). Finally,
to the extent that any Johnson factors are subsumed in the lodestar, they should not be reconsidered
2
Note, Plaintiff’s attorneys have requested $30,000. R. Doc. 139, p. 7. Although the Court finds that the total
hours (317.5) at the stated rate ($94.50) would total fees of $30,003.75, the Court will award the requested amount.
4
when determining whether an adjustment to the lodestar is required. Migis v. Pearle Vision, Inc.,
135 F.3d 1041, 1047 (5th Cir. 1998). The Court has carefully evaluated the Johnson factors and
finds no adjustment of the lodestar is warranted.
VI.
Filling, Witness, and Travel Fees
Heron and Porter also submitted documents requesting award for fees in conjunction with
filing documents, witness testimonies, and travel expenses, which is undisputed. The fee
agreement with the Plaintiff contemplates the payment of these expenses by the Plaintiff. R. Doc.
120-3, p. 2. Heron and Porter are requesting $400.00 for the filing of the original complaint. R.
Doc. 139, p. 7.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1821 the above mentioned attorneys are also requesting award for
witness per diem, eight witnesses have been listed with a per diem of $40 per person, giving a total
amount of $320.00. R. Doc. 139, p. 7-8.
Heron and Porter are requesting $625.00 for the attorney’s travel expenses. Counsel
provided documentation stating that they traveled 2,500 miles at the rate of $0.25 per mile, giving
a total amount of $625.00. R. Doc. 139, p. 8.
Lastly, counsel is requesting compensation for service fees: $450.00 for service of the
original complaint, $450.00 for service of the Subpoena of Witnesses for Trial, and $450.00 for
service of Subpoena of Witness for Resetting of Trial. Altogether, counsel is requesting service
fees in a total amount of $1,350.00. R. Doc. 139, p. 8.
The Court will award Heron and Porter a total aggregate amount of $32,695.00:
$30,000.00 for legal services rendered, $400.00 filing fee, $320.00 witness per diem, $625.00
travel expenses, and $1,350.00 for service fees.
5
VII.
Conclusion
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Release Attorney’s Fees and Costs from
the Registry of the Court (R.Doc.120) is GRANTED. Angela Jones, et al is awarded reasonable
attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $32,695.00 to be paid to movant from the courts registry
no later than twenty-one (21) days from the signing of this Order.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 29th day of August 2016.
KAREN WELLS ROBY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
6
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?