Castillo-Antonio v. Bueno
- Jacquelyn Corley
- 3:18-cv-04589
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 12
In Castillo-Antonio v. Bueno, Judge Corley granted in part the attorney-fee motion and ordered Bueno to pay $14,469.
Jose Daniel Castillo-Antonio receives $14,469 in attorney’s fees and costs from Guadalupe Antonio Bueno; the ruling determines the amount Bueno must pay after their settlement.
What happened
In Castillo-Antonio v. Bueno, Jose Daniel Castillo-Antonio sued Guadalupe Antonio Bueno over alleged accessibility barriers at Tacos Sinaloa, a taco truck. The parties settled, agreeing that attorney’s fees would be decided separately.
Castillo-Antonio requested $21,700 for 62 hours of attorney work at $350 per hour. Bueno did not dispute that Castillo-Antonio was entitled to fees but argued that some of the hours were excessive or unrelated to Bueno.
The court granted in part the fee motion. Judge Corley found the hourly rate reasonable but reduced the compensable time to 41.34 hours and ordered Bueno to pay $14,469 in fees and costs.
The detailed version
- Castillo-Antonio v. Bueno · No. 3:18-cv-04589
- Jacquelyn Corley
- Sept. 13, 2019
Background
Jose Daniel Castillo-Antonio, who uses a wheelchair, sued Guadalupe Antonio Bueno, the owner and operator of Tacos Sinaloa, alleging violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and related California laws. The complaint alleged barriers including improper parking spaces, inaccessible routes, a service counter that was too high, steep ramps, and a bathroom that was too small.
The parties reached a partial settlement on June 4, 2019. They agreed that the court would decide attorney’s fees separately. Castillo-Antonio then moved for an award of fees.
Legal standard
The Americans with Disabilities Act allows a prevailing party to seek attorney’s fees and costs. A plaintiff can qualify as a prevailing party by entering a legally enforceable settlement with the defendant. The court used the lodestar method, which calculates fees by multiplying the reasonable hours worked by a reasonable hourly rate. The party requesting fees must provide billing records showing that the hours and rate are reasonable.
Requested fees and hours
Castillo-Antonio requested $21,700, based on 62 hours at $350 per hour. Bueno argued that the hours were inflated or unreasonable for several tasks.
The court reduced the time claimed for drafting the complaint from 4.7 hours to 1 hour because the complaint was materially similar to complaints filed in other Americans with Disabilities Act cases. The court reduced the time for the motion to strike affirmative defenses by 8 hours, awarding 10.2 hours instead of 18.2 hours. It denied compensation for 6.1 hours spent litigating against Golden Valley & Associates, Inc., because those fees should not be charged to Bueno, and denied another 0.5 hours spent preparing a motion for entry of default against property owners for the same reason.
The court did not reduce the time spent communicating with Castillo-Antonio, conducting and reviewing the site inspection, preparing required disclosures, reading emails, or reviewing Bueno’s amended answer. The court reduced the time spent preparing the fee motion to 5.64 hours because some of the underlying time entries were unreasonable.
Overall, the court reduced the claimed time by 20.66 hours, leaving 41.34 compensable hours.
Hourly rate
The court found the requested $350 hourly rate reasonable. It relied on counsel’s experience litigating more than one hundred Americans with Disabilities Act cases in the Northern District of California and on prevailing rates in the Bay Area. The court found no basis to reduce the rate for alleged overstaffing or delegation to support staff.
Ruling
The court granted in part Castillo-Antonio’s motion for attorney’s fees. Judge Jacquelyn Corley ordered Bueno to pay $14,469 in fees and costs, reflecting 41.34 hours at $350 per hour.
Read the full 12-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.