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)

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