Carlson v. City of Delafield et al

Filing 67

ORDER signed by Judge Rudolph T Randa on 6/29/10 GRANTING 63 Motion for Attorney Fees to the extent that they are awarded $2,762.00 in fees, and DENIED in all other respects. (cc: all counsel) (Randa, Rudolph)(dm)

C a r l s o n v. City of Delafield et al

D o c . 67

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

M A T T H E W D. CARLSON, P l a i n t i f f, v. C IT Y OF DELAFIELD, M I C H E L E DE YOE, JEFF KRICKHAHN, BETH ANN LEONARD, GERALD MAC DOUGALL, and ERV SADOWSKI, Defendants. C a s e No. 08-C-751

DECISION AND ORDER

B y an April 21, 2010, Decision and Order, this Court awarded the Defendants, th e City of Delafield ("Delafield"), Michele De Yoe ("De Yoe"), Jeff Krickhahn ("K rick h ah n "), Beth Ann Leonard ("Leonard"), Gerald MacDougall ("MacDougall"), and Erv S a d o w sk i ("Sadowski") (collectively the "Defendants") reasonable expenses incurred in d e f e n d in g the motion to compel filed by Plaintiff Matthew D. Carlson ("Carlson"). As a re su lt, the Defendants filed a motion for attorney's fees seeking a total award of $4,281.00 in a tto rn e ys' fees which includes $2,759.00 for pre-filing attorneys' fees, plus $1522.00 in a tto rn e ys ' fees incurred in responding to the motion to compel from the date of filing. The D e f en d a n ts state that the hourly rates charged by counsel, $155.00 per hour for Attorney Ryan G . Braithwaite and $165.00 per hour for Attorney Raymond J. Pollen, are below the

Dockets.Justia.com

M ilw au k ee , Wisconsin market rate for civil rights attorneys which is at least $250.00 per hour. Carlson does not object to the $1,522.00 in fees for the Defendants' response to h is January 12, 2010, motion to compel. However, he maintains that the award of any other p re -f illin g fees is not appropriate in this case, and he specifically objects to the fees incurred in late November 2009 for legal research and analysis regarding the potential for a motion to co m p el electronic discovery, because the work was done two weeks before the discovery d is p u te between the parties. The Court's Decision and Order awarded the Defendants' reasonable request f o r reasonable expenses incurred in defending the motion to compel. The hourly rates charged b y counsel for the Defendants is below the market average for civil rights litigation and is clearly reasonable. See Schlacher v. Law Offices of Phillip J. Rotche & Assocs., P.C., 574 F .3 d 852, 856-57 (7th Cir. 2009). The time expended in defending Carlson's motion to c o m p e l beginning with its January 12, 2010, filing is reasonable and compensable. See id. L ik e w ise , the Court deems that the work done by counsel beginning December 15, 2009, in re sp o n se to the correspondence from Carlson regarding the discovery disputes was reasonable in terms of hours and is compensable as fees incurred in defense of the motion. See id. H o w e v e r, the 9.8 hours of work done on November 28, and 29, 2009, at a cost of $1,519.00, a re not compensable because they precede the existence of the discovery dispute (See T re b a to s k i Aff. filed on Jan. 12, 2010 ¶¶ 15-19; Braithwaite Aff. filed on Jan. 28, 2010 ¶¶ 15, 2 6 .) Therefore, the Court has subtracted $1,519.00 from the requested attorneys' fee award

2

o f $4,281.00. The Defendants are awarded $2,762.00 in attorneys' fees that they may recover f ro m Carlson. NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING, IT IS HEREBY O R D E R E D THAT: The Defendants' motion for attorneys' fees (Docket No. 63) is GRANTED to th e extent that they are awarded $2,762.00 in fees, and DENIED in all other respects. Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 29th day of June, 2010. BY THE COURT s / Rudolph T. Randa H o n . Rudolph T. Randa U .S . District Judge

3