U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Operture, Inc.

Filing 23

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 17 U.S. Bank's motion for attorneys' fees and costs is DENIED without prejudice to its ability to file a new motion that complies with the Local Rules. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 11/22/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for LSF9 Master Participation Trust, 5 Plaintiff 6 2:16-cv-02938-JAD-NJK Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs v. 7 [ECF No. 17] Operture, Inc., 8 Defendant 9 10 11 In this action for quiet title, unjust enrichment, and a preliminary injunction,1 plaintiff U.S. Bank 12 Trust, N.A., as Trustee for LSF9 Master Participation Trust, moves for attorneys’ fees and costs after 13 default judgment was entered against defendant Operture, Inc.2 But U.S. Bank’s motion fails to 14 comply with Local Rules 54-1 and 54-14, so I deny it without prejudice to U.S. Bank’s ability to file a 15 new motion that complies with the local rules. 16 17 Discussion A. Attorneys’ fees and costs U.S. Bank requests $5,654.50 in attorneys’ fees and $1,045.50 in costs.3 NRS § 18.010(b) 18 19 permits an award of attorneys’ fees to a prevailing party “when the court finds that the claim, 20 counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint or defense of the opposing party was brought or 21 maintained without reasonable ground or to harass the prevailing party.”4 And NRS § 18.020 permits 22 an award of costs to a prevailing party in a claim for the return of real property or of a “possessory 23 24 1 ECF No. 1 at 1. 2 ECF No. 17. 3 ECF 17 at 9. 4 NEV. REV. STAT . § 18.010(b) (2015). 25 26 27 28 1 right” in real property.5 But, because U.S. Bank fails to satisfy the Local Rules, I can award neither 2 fees nor costs at this time. 3 U.S. Bank’s request for attorneys’ fees includes only the total amount sought and an analysis of 4 the factors that the Nevada Supreme Court adopted in Brunzell v. Golden Gate National Bank 6 for 5 evaluating the reasonableness of attorneys’ fees.7 Local Rule 54-14, however, requires that “[a] 6 reasonable itemization and description of the work performed” be included when attempting to recover 7 attorneys’ fees.8 An itemization and description of the work performed is absent from the fees 8 requested. U.S. Bank therefore fails to comply with Local Rule 54-14, and I deny its request. Local 9 Rule 54-1 similarly requires a prevailing party requesting costs to file an itemized bill of costs and 10 disbursements.9 Although U.S. Bank refers to a “Memorandum of Costs and Disbursements filed 11 concurrently” with this motion,10 no such memorandum was actually filed.11 So, because an itemization 12 of costs is absent, I also deny the request for costs. 13 Conclusion 14 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that U.S. Bank’s motion for attorneys’ fees and 15 costs [ECF No. 17] is denied without prejudice to its ability to file a new motion that complies with 16 the Local Rules. 17 DATED: November 22, 2017. 18 _______________________________ _________________ _ __ _ _ _ U.S. District Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey t Judge Jennifer A. D dg nn 19 20 5 NEV. REV. STAT . § 18.020(1) (2015). 22 6 Brunzell v. Golden Gate Nat’l Bank, 455 P.2d 31 (Nev. 1969). 23 7 Id. at 33; ECF No. 17 at 3–9. 8 See LR 54-14(b)(1). 9 See LR 54-1(b). 21 24 25 26 27 28 10 ECF No. 17 at 8. 11 See generally docket report, case no. 2:16-cv-02938-JAD-NJK. 2

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?