Rose Leaf Cleaning, Inc. v. Sonder Hospitality USA, Inc.
- Rearden
- 1:22-cv-07462
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rose Leaf Cleaning v. Sonder Hospitality, Judge Rearden granted Sonder’s fees-and-costs motion in part, awarding $266,817.96 but no prejudgment interest.
Sonder Hospitality USA, Inc. received an award of $266,817.96 in attorney’s fees and costs. Rose Leaf Cleaning, Inc. was ordered to pay that amount. Sonder did not receive prejudgment interest on the award.
What happened
Rose Leaf Cleaning, Inc. v. Sonder Hospitality USA, Inc. concerned Sonder’s request for attorney’s fees and costs incurred defending the case. Rose Leaf told the court it did not oppose the request.
The court awarded Sonder $266,817.96: $260,768.50 in attorney’s fees and $6,049.46 in costs. The award was based on the court’s determination that Sonder could recover the fees and costs it incurred defending the matter.
The court granted Sonder’s motion for fees and costs in part and ruled that Rose Leaf must pay the award. Judge Jennifer H. Rearden also ruled that Sonder was not entitled to prejudgment interest on the fees and costs.
The detailed version
- Rose Leaf Cleaning, Inc. v. Sonder Hospitality USA, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-07462
- Rearden
- Sept. 4, 2025
Background
Defendant Sonder Hospitality USA, Inc. filed a motion for fees and costs on November 4, 2024. Plaintiff Rose Leaf Cleaning, Inc. stated that it did not oppose the request. The opinion refers to an earlier ruling applying California law to Rose Leaf’s breach-of-contract claims and New York law to Rose Leaf’s tort claims.
Ruling
The court ordered that Sonder’s motion for fees and costs was granted in part. It ruled that Sonder was entitled to recover the fees and costs it incurred defending the case and ordered Rose Leaf to pay $266,817.96, consisting of $260,768.50 in attorney’s fees and $6,049.46 in costs.
The court also ruled that Sonder was not entitled to prejudgment interest on the fees and costs. It explained that the parties’ agreement did not expressly provide for interest on an attorney’s-fees award and that neither California law nor New York law authorized the requested prejudgment interest on this award.
Effect of the Order
Rose Leaf owes the stated fees-and-costs award under the order. The opinion does not award Sonder prejudgment interest.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.