Morris et al v. AAA Moving & Storage, LLC

Filing 11

ORDER that the Court reserves ruling on re 10 Plaintiffs' MOTION for Attorney Fees; and Plaintiffs shall file a memoranda and accompanying affidavit and evidence supporting the reasonableness of the fee sought within 14 days. Signed by District Judge Richard Voorhees on 8/13/15. (smj)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATESVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15-CV-68
WILLIAM BOYD MORRIS AND KAREN
ELIZABETH KUESTER,
Plaintiffs,
v.
AAA MOVING AND STORAGE, LLC,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

BEFORE THE COURT is William Boyd Morris and Karen Elizabeth Kuester’s
(collectively “Plaintiffs’”) motion for attorney’s fees (Doc. 10). On July 14, 2015, Plaintiffs
moved for a default judgment. (Doc. 8). On July 15, 2015, Plaintiffs received a default judgment
in the amount of $17,083.64 plus interest from the date of judgment. (Doc. 9).
Plaintiffs claim that they are entitled to attorney’s fees pursuant to the Carmack
Amendment at 49 U.S.C. § 14708 entitled “Dispute settlement program for household goods
carriers.” Paragraph (d), “Attorney’s fees to shippers,” provides that:
In any court action to resolve a dispute between a shipper of household goods
and a carrier providing transportation or service subject to jurisdiction under
subchapter I or III of chapter 135 concerning the transportation of household
goods by such carrier, the shipper shall be awarded reasonable attorney's fees if(1) the shipper submits a claim to the carrier within 120 days after the date the
shipment is delivered or the date the delivery is scheduled, whichever is later;
(2) the shipper prevails in such court action; and
(3)
(A) the shipper was not advised by the carrier during the claim
settlement process that a dispute settlement program was available to
resolve the dispute;
(B) a decision resolving the dispute was not rendered through
arbitration under this section within the period provided under
subsection (b)(8) of this section or an extension of such period under
such subsection; or
(C) the court proceeding is to enforce a decision rendered through
arbitration under this section and is instituted after the period for
performance under such decision has elapsed.

49 U.S.C. § 14708(d).
The Complaint and the ensuing default judgment show that Plaintiffs submitted a claim
to the carrier within one hundred twenty days after the date the shipment was delivered. (Doc. 1,
at ¶ 30). The shippers, Plaintiffs, prevailed in the instant court action. Further, the Complaint
and the ensuing default judgment show that the Plaintiffs were not advised by Defendant that a
dispute settlement program was available to resolve the dispute. (Id. at ¶ 33). Further, no
arbitration decision has been rendered. Accordingly, (A) and (B) of subdivision (3) are satisfied.
Therefore, attorney’s fees shall be awarded.
Plaintiffs request $12,425.00 in attorney’s fees, which is calculated from 49.7 hours of
billed time multiplied by Plaintiffs’ attorney’s $250.00 hourly rate. Plaintiffs submitted a billing
statement from their attorney to substantiate the motion. Although there are separate entries, the
time spent on each entry is not indicated but rather is located at the bottom of the bill. Plaintiffs
have not provided any information or memoranda detailing reasonableness of the amount sought.
Accordingly, this Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to submit a memorandum and accompanying
material supporting the reasonableness of the fee amount sought in accordance with the twelve
factors below:
(1) the time and labor expended; (2) the novelty and difficulty of
the questions raised; (3) the skill required to properly perform the
legal services rendered; (4) the attorney's opportunity costs in
pressing the instant litigation; (5) the customary fee for like work;
(6) the attorney's expectations at the outset of the litigation; (7) the
time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; (8) the
amount in controversy and the results obtained; (9) the experience,
reputation and ability of the attorney; (10) the undesirability of the
case within the legal community in which the suit arose; (11) the
nature and length of the professional relationship between attorney
and client; and (12) attorneys' fees awards in similar cases.

Robinson v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, 560 F.3d 235, 243-44 (4th Cir. 2009) (quoting Barber v.
Kimbrell’s Inc., 577 F.2d 216, 226 n.28 (4th Cir. 1978); see also Ward v. Allied Van Lines, Inc.,
231 F.3d 135, 142 (4th Cir. 2000) (reviewing reasonableness award in similar circumstances).
The Court will use the following factors to determine a “lodestar figure by multiplying the
number of reasonable hours expended times a reasonable rate.” Robinson, 560 F.3d at 243. “In
addition to the attorney's own affidavits, the fee applicant must produce satisfactory specific
evidence of the prevailing market rates in the relevant community for the type of work for which
he seeks an award.” Id. at 244 (quoting Plyler v. Evatt, 902 F.2d 273, 277 (4th Cir. 1990)).
Ordinarily, this requirement may be satisfied by a sworn affidavit by a lawyer qualified to opine
on counsel’s request for fees.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED THAT
(1) The Court reserves ruling on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. 10); and
(2) Plaintiffs’ shall file a memoranda and accompanying affidavit(s) and evidence supporting
the reasonableness of the fee sought within fourteen (14) days.

Signed: August 13, 2015