Johnson v. Li
- Edward Davila
- 5:19-cv-08075
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 10
Scott Johnson v. Edward K. Lei, Judge Davila, granted in part and denied in part fees and costs, awarding $6,157.50 in fees and $875 in costs.
Scott Johnson and his attorneys were awarded reduced attorneys’ fees and the full requested costs; the order also affects defendants Edward K. Lei and the other named defendants because it determines the amounts awarded after the judgment.
What happened
In Scott Johnson v. Edward K. Lei, Scott Johnson asked for attorneys’ fees and costs after winning a judgment based on the defendants’ accepted settlement offer. The court considered whether his requested amounts were reasonable.
The court reduced the requested hourly rates and the number of compensable hours. It awarded $6,157.50 in attorneys’ fees instead of the $10,945 requested, but awarded all $875 in requested litigation costs.
Judge Davila granted in part and denied in part Johnson’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. The order awarded $6,157.50 in fees and $875 in costs.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. Li · No. 5:19-cv-08075
- Edward Davila
- June 17, 2020
Background
Scott Johnson, who the opinion identifies as a person with quadriplegia, sued defendants who operate a Family Healthcare Center in Sunnyvale, California. He alleged that the defendants failed to provide accessible paths of travel, sales counters, and restrooms.
On April 14, 2020, the court entered judgment for Johnson under an accepted settlement offer made under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68. The judgment entitled Johnson to $6,500 and reasonable litigation costs and attorneys’ fees. Johnson then sought $10,945 in attorneys’ fees and $875 in litigation costs. The defendants did not challenge his entitlement to fees but argued that the requested hourly rates and some billing entries were too high.
Legal standard
The court explained that the Americans with Disabilities Act and California law allow a prevailing plaintiff to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees. A plaintiff who obtains an enforceable settlement is considered a prevailing party. The court used the lodestar method, which calculates fees by multiplying reasonable hours by a reasonable hourly rate.
The court evaluated hourly rates based on the prevailing rates in the relevant community for attorneys with comparable skill, experience, and reputation. It also reviewed the billing records to determine whether the hours were reasonably spent. Clerical and administrative tasks generally are not recoverable as attorneys’ fees.
Hourly rates
Johnson requested hourly rates of $650 for Mark Potter, $450 for Amanda Seabock and Dennis Price, and $400 for Josie Zimmermann. The court found that the evidence did not adequately justify those specific rates for this relatively straightforward disability-access case.
The court approved rates of $475 per hour for Potter, $350 per hour for Seabock and Price, and $250 per hour for Zimmermann. The court selected the lower rate for Zimmermann because she was newly admitted to practice and had recently joined the law firm.
Hours billed
The attorneys’ billing records listed 21.1 hours. The court reduced the compensable time to 17.8 hours. It reduced time for duplicative work on the complaint, preparation of a simple settlement notice, boilerplate initial disclosures, administrative tasks, and one hour of time billed for a hearing that the court had vacated.
The court also billed 2.8 hours of Potter’s time at $350 per hour rather than his approved rate of $475 because it viewed the work as routine due-diligence work that could have been handled by a less senior attorney.
Award
The court calculated the attorneys’ fees as follows: Potter received $1,122.50 for 3.1 hours; Seabock received $1,470 for 4.2 hours; Price received $3,465 for 9.9 hours; and Zimmermann received $100 for 0.4 hours. The total attorneys’ fee award was $6,157.50.
Johnson also requested $875 in costs: $75 for service fees, $400 for filing fees, and $400 for investigation fees. Although defendants objected to the investigation fees because there was no formal invoice, the court found no basis to conclude that the stated payment was untruthful. It awarded the full $875 in costs.
Disposition
The court granted in part and denied in part Johnson’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. It awarded $6,157.50 in attorneys’ fees and $875 in costs.
Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.