Trustees of the Local 7 Tile Industry Welfare Fund, Trustees of the Local 7 Tile Industry Annuity Fund, Trustees of the Tile Layers Local Union 52 Pension Fund et al v. Larsen Marble & Tile, LLC
Filing
20
ORDER ADOPTING IN PART AND OVERRULING IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. I hereby adopt the Report and Recommendation except for a minor correction to the award of attorney's fees set forth herein. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Ordered by Judge Allyne R. Ross on 12/5/2018. (Nellis, Andrew)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Trustees of the Local 7 Tile Industry Welfare Fund, et al.,
1:18-CV-1025 (ARR) (SMG)
Plaintiffs,
Not for Publication
– against –
Larsen Marble & Tile, LLC,
Order
Defendant.
ROSS, United States District Judge:
The court has received the Report and Recommendation on the instant case dated November
19, 2018, from the Honorable Steven M. Gold, United States Magistrate Judge. The deadline for filing
objections has passed, and no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the court has reviewed the
Report and Recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory
committee’s note to subdivision (b); Gusler v. City of Long Beach, 823 F. Supp. 2d 98, 109 (E.D.N.Y.
2011), appeal dismissed, 700 F.3d 646 (2d Cir. 2012). Having reviewed the record, I hereby adopt the
Report and Recommendation in part and overrule it in part. Specifically, I adopt the Report and
Recommendation except for a minor correction to the award of attorney’s fees.
In their motion for default judgment, the plaintiffs sought, inter alia, attorney’s fees of $2359,
for 13.6 hours of work. Br. 6, ECF No. 15. In particular, the plaintiffs argued that they incurred fees
of $265 per hour for work done by associate attorneys and of $115 per hour for work done by
paralegals. Br. 5. And the plaintiffs submitted time records showing that “NM”1 had billed 5.3 hours
“NM” is Nicole Marimon, counsel for the plaintiffs. Marimon Decl. ¶ 14, ECF No. 14. The other
individuals are unidentified and presumed to be support staff.
1
1
at $265 per hour, that “EC” had billed 8.2 hours at $115 per hour, and that “MM” had billed 0.1 hours
at $115 per hour. Time Records, ECF No. 14-4.2
In his Report and Recommendation, Judge Gold reasonably determined to award the plaintiffs
attorney’s fees at lesser rates: $200 per hour for work done by attorneys and $90 per hour for work
done by legal assistants. See R. & R. 13, ECF No. 18. It appears, however, that the time billed by
“MM,” an assistant, was erroneously attributed to “NM,” an attorney, in the calculation of the revised
fee award. See id. (“Plaintiffs’ attorney spent 5.4 hours working on this action and her legal assistant
spent 8.2 hours, for a total of 13.6 hours.”). Adopting the rates found reasonable by Judge Gold, I
thus instead award the plaintiffs attorney’s fees of $1807.00: $1060.00 for the 5.3 hours billed by “NM”
and $747.00 for the 8.3 hours billed by “EC” and “MM.”
I adopt the other amounts awarded by Judge Gold in full. See R. & R. 14–15.
The Clerk of Court is therefore directed to enter judgment for the plaintiffs awarding the
following damages: (a) $187,526.23 in unpaid contributions; (b) interest at a rate of $44.77 per day for
the Local 7 Benefit Funds and at a rate of $9.91 per day for the International Benefit Funds,3 to be
calculated by the Clerk of Court beginning from October 31, 2015, through the date of judgment
herein; (c) $32,960.31 in liquidated damages; (d) $5440.00 in audit costs; and (e) $2283.02 in attorney’s
fees and costs. And the plaintiffs are awarded postjudgment interest on the entire amount of the
judgment at the statutory rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1961.
So ordered.
___/s/_________________
Allyne R. Ross
United States District Judge
Dated:
2
3
December 5, 2018
Brooklyn, New York
Thus, “NM” had billed $1404.50, “EC” had billed $943.00, and “MM” had billed $11.50, totalling $2359.00.
Both terms defined in the Report and Recommendation. See R. & R. 1.
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?