Two Men and a Truck/International, Inc.

Filing 35

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The Plaintiff's unopposed Motion to Fix Attorneys' Fees Previously Awarded (Filing No. 32 ) is granted, as follows: The Plaintiff shall recover from the Defendant the sum of $20,345.80 in attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in bringing its motion to hold the Defendant in contempt and for sanctions. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to defendant)(AOA)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
TWO MEN AND A
TRUCK/INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

CASE NO. 8:12CV340

Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

vs.
ROBET LEE THOMAS, individually and
d/b/a “TWO MEN AND TWO TRUCKS,”
Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Fix
Attorneys’ Fees Previously Awarded (Filing No. 32). On February 4, 2013, the Plaintiff
filed a motion seeking to hold the Defendant in contempt and for sanctions. (Filing No.
26.) After a hearing (Filing No. 30), the Court granted the Plaintiff’s motion to hold the
Defendant in contempt and for sanctions. Pursuant to the Plaintiff’s request, the Court
ordered, in relevant part, that “[t]he Defendant . . . pay the Plaintiff its reasonable
attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in bring[ing] the [motion for contempt and sanctions].”
(Filing No. 31 at 3 ¶ 4.) The Court directed the Plaintiff to “submit its statement of
attorneys’ fees and costs . . . on or before March 18, 2013.” (Id.)
The Plaintiff filed the present Motion on March 18, 2013, along with a supporting
brief and index of evidence (Filing Nos. 33 & 34), to support its claim to an award of
attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in bringing its motion to hold the Defendant in
contempt and for sanctions. The declarations of the Plaintiff’s attorneys’ reflect that the
Plaintiff incurred $20,345.80 in attorneys’ fees and costs1 in bringing its motion to hold
Defendant in contempt and for sanctions, and the billing statements attached to those
declarations indicate that the Plaintiff incurred that amount of fees and costs in bringing

1

The declarations reflect that the total attorneys’ fees the Plaintiff incurred equal $19,652.50, and
that the total costs incurred equal $693.30.

its motion for contempt and sanctions. The Defendant has not opposed the Plaintiff’s
Motion, and the time for filing an opposition has expired. See NECivR 7.1(b)(1)(B).
Having reviewed the matter, the Court finds that the Plaintiff has pointed to
evidence indicating that it has incurred $20,345.80 in attorneys’ fees and expenses in
bringing its motion to hold the Defendant in contempt and for sanctions, and that the
amount of attorneys’ fees the Plaintiff seeks to recover constitutes a reasonable
attorney fee pursuant to Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983).2
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Fix Attorneys’ Fees
Previously Awarded (Filing No. 32) is granted, as follows:
The Plaintiff shall recover from the Defendant the sum of $20,345.80 in attorneys’
fees and expenses incurred in bringing its motion to hold the Defendant in
contempt and for sanctions.
Dated this 16th day of April, 2013.
BY THE COURT:

s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief United States District Judge

2

See Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938, 956-57 (8th Cir. 2010) (quoting Hensley, 461 U.S. at 433–
34 & n.7)):
The most useful starting point for determining the amount of a reasonable fee is the
number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation multiplied by a reasonable hourly
rate. This calculation provides an objective basis on which to make an initial estimate of
the value of a lawyer's services. The party seeking an award of fees should submit
evidence supporting the hours worked and rates claimed. Where the documentation of
hours is inadequate, the district court may reduce the award accordingly.
The district court also should exclude from this initial fee calculation hours that were not
“reasonably expended.” Cases may be overstaffed, and the skill and experience of
lawyers vary widely. Counsel for the prevailing party should make a good-faith effort to
exclude from a fee request hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise
unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private practice ethically is obligated to exclude such
hours from his fee submission.

2