Prosperity Bank v. Tom's Marine and Salvage, LLC, et al
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that 85 Motion to Set Amount of Attorney's Fees and Costs is GRANTED, and Prosperity Bank is awarded $71,373.76 in attorney's fees and costs. Signed by Judge Wendy B Vitter on 11/17/2020.(jeg)
Case 2:18-cv-09106-WBV-MBN Document 92 Filed 11/17/20 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
TOM’S MARINE & SALVAGE, LLC, ET AL.
The Court, having considered Plaintiff’s Motion to Set Amount of Attorney’s
Fees and Costs,1 the record, the applicable law, the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation,2 and the failure of the parties to file any objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, hereby approves the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation and adopts it, as modified, as its opinion herein.
While the Court completely agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s analysis, the
Court modifies the award of attorney’s fees and costs awarded to Prosperity Bank
based upon the consent of the parties, as communicated to the Court via email on
November 6, 2020. According to that email communication, which was sent after the
Magistrate Judge issued his Report and Recommendation on October 30, 2020, the
parties have agreed that Tom’s Marine & Salvage, LLC, Tom’s Welding, Inc., Tom’s
Investment and Khai Duc Dihn (collectively, “Defendants”) shall pay Prosperity Bank
$71,373.76, in attorney’s fees and costs, in return for Prosperity Bank not recording
the final judgment in this case for 60 days. The Court notes that the amount of
attorney’s fees and costs to which the parties have agreed is the same amount
R. Doc. 85.
R. Doc. 91.
Case 2:18-cv-09106-WBV-MBN Document 92 Filed 11/17/20 Page 2 of 2
requested by Prosperity Bank in the instant Motion.3 The Court further notes that
Defendants filed an 11-page Opposition brief to that Motion, which, as the Magistrate
Judge observed, was “flawed and caused the Court to spend far more time on this
decision than should have been necessary.”4 Such flaws forced the Magistrate Judge
to “put on his ‘green eye shade’ to do all this unnecessary work because Defendants
would not be troubled to do that work, when it is their money at stake.”5
The Court finds that, not only have the parties wasted judicial resources, they
also caused a three-month delay in the issuance of a final judgment in this case.
Nonetheless, because the parties have reached an agreement regarding the attorney’s
fees and costs, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation,
as modified, to reflect the consent agreement reached by the parties.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Set Amount of Attorney’s Fees and
Costs is GRANTED, and Prosperity Bank is awarded $71,373.76 in attorney’s fees
New Orleans, Louisiana, November 17, 2020.
WENDY B. VITTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: Magistrate Judge North
R. Doc. 85 at p. 1.
R. Doc. 91 at p. 2.
5 Id. at p. 3 (quoting Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger, 137 S.Ct. 1178, 1187, 197 L.Ed.2d 585
(2017) (“But as we stressed in Fox, trial courts undertaking that task ‘need not, and indeed should
not, become green-eyeshade accountants’ (or whatever the contemporary equivalent is).”).
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?