Frederick Michele Brady v. Patenaude & Felix, A Professional Corporation
- Nathanael Cousins
- 5:18-cv-07305
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Brady v. Patenaude & Felix, Judge Cousins granted in part and denied in part Brady’s fee motion, awarding $14,765.05.
Brady’s attorneys received an award of $14,765.05 in fees and costs instead of the $20,330.05 requested; the defendants opposed the larger request.
What happened
In Frederick Michele Brady v. Patenaude & Felix and Michael R. Boulanger, Brady prevailed in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case and accepted the defendants’ $2,001.00 offer of judgment. The parties could not agree on a reasonable amount of attorneys’ fees and costs.
Brady requested $20,330.05. The court found that his attorneys reasonably spent 31.8 hours on the case, but that their requested hourly rates were too high for this straightforward debt-collection case. The court instead approved rates of $475 and $375 per hour and allowed $500.05 in costs.
Judge Nathanael M. Cousins granted in part and denied in part the motion for attorneys’ fees. The court awarded Brady’s counsel $14,765.05 in fees and costs.
The detailed version
- Frederick Michele Brady v. Patenaude & Felix, A Professional Corporation · No. 5:18-cv-07305
- Nathanael Cousins
- Oct. 25, 2019
Background
Brady prevailed in a case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. He accepted the defendants’ $2,001.00 offer of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68. Afterward, the parties were unable to agree on the amount of attorneys’ fees and costs.
Brady requested $20,330.05: $15,210 for 23.4 hours of work by attorney Fred W. Schwinn at $650 per hour, $4,620 for 8.4 hours of work by attorney Raeon R. Roulston at $550 per hour, and $500.05 in costs. The defendants argued that $6,202.50 was reasonable.
Legal standard
Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Rosenthal Act, a prevailing plaintiff may recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. The court used the “lodestar” method, which calculates a fee by multiplying the reasonable hours worked by a reasonable hourly rate.
Analysis
The court found that Brady’s counsel reasonably spent 31.8 hours on the case: 23.4 hours for Schwinn and 8.4 hours for Roulston. The defendants argued generally that the total hours were excessive and compared the case to other cases involving default judgments. But they did not identify specific inaccurate, duplicative, or excessive billing entries. The court’s own review also found no duplicative or excessive entries.
The court rejected the requested hourly rates as too high for this straightforward debt-collection case. It found that Brady’s counsel had not shown that the requested rates matched prevailing market rates for similar work. Relying on a similar case in the Northern District of California, the court found reasonable rates of $475 per hour for Schwinn and $375 per hour for Roulston.
The court allowed the requested $500.05 in costs, which included court filing fees and administrative expenses.
Disposition
The court granted in part and denied in part Brady’s motion for attorneys’ fees. It awarded 23.4 hours at $475 per hour for Schwinn, totaling $11,115; 8.4 hours at $375 per hour for Roulston, totaling $3,150; and $500.05 in costs, for a total award of $14,765.05.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.