Castleberry v. Daimler Chrysler Truck Financial et al
Filing
94
ORDER Requiring Supplemental Exhibit re: 92 MOTION for Attorney Fees and Costs filed by Daimler Chrysler Truck Financial, signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (MWil)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DOMINIC CASTLEBERRY,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-11460
Plaintiff,
DISTRICT JUDGE ROBERT H. CLELAND
v.
MAGISTRATE JUDGE R. STEVEN WHALEN
DAIMLER CHRYSLER TRUCK
FINANCIAL “aka” CHRYSLER
FINANCIAL SERVICES AMERICAS,
LLC,
Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER REQUIRING SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBIT
On April 2, 2013, Defendant Daimler Chrysler Truck Financial “aka” Chrysler
Financial Services Americas, LLC (“Defendant”) filed a motion for attorney fees and costs
pursuant to the terms of Plaintiff Dominic Castleberry’s August, 2007 finance agreement and
Fed R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2). Docket #92. Defendant submitted an affidavit and exhibits showing
invoices for “legal services rendered in pursuing and defending [same] litigation” for $108,
845.77 in attorney fees and $420.77 in costs.” Id., Exhibit 1 ¶7. However, the invoices do
not demarcate between work performed defending Plaintiff’s claims (brought under Fair
Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b), 1681s-2, and Michigan Collection
Practices Act (“MCPA”), M.C.L. § 445.251 et seq.) and Defendant’s counterclaim for breach
of contract.
Within seven days, Defendant will provide this Court with a breakdown of fees and
costs showing the portions attributable to (1) defense of the original claims, and (2) pursuit
of the counterclaim for breach of contract.
IT IS SO ORDERED
Dated: September 16, 2013
s/R. Steven Whalen
R. STEVEN WHALEN,
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record on
September 16, 2013, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable R. Steven Whalen
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?