Beckler v. Rent Recovery Solutions, LLC

Background

Adrianna Beckler alleged that Rent Recovery Solutions, LLC (RRS), a debt collection agency, violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act while attempting to collect a $900 debt allegedly owed to a former landlord. Beckler disputed the debt and requested written documentation. RRS did not later contact her or provide the requested documentation, but it reported the alleged debt to a credit reporting agency.

Beckler filed this action seeking actual damages, $1,000 in statutory damages, costs, and reasonable attorney fees. RRS later made an offer of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 for $2,000 plus Beckler’s reasonable attorney fees and costs. Beckler accepted the offer. The remaining dispute concerned the amount of attorney fees.

Fee Request and Legal Standard

Beckler requested $18,810 for 50.75 hours of work by attorneys Darren B. Schwiebert and John Butha and paralegal Mary Vrieze. RRS argued that the award should be reduced to $1,944.

The court applied the lodestar method, which generally calculates a reasonable fee by multiplying reasonable hours by a reasonable hourly rate. The party seeking fees must provide documentation showing the work performed, the requested rates, and the hours billed. Courts may exclude hours that are excessive, duplicative, or unnecessary.

Hourly Rates

Beckler requested rates of $450 per hour for Schwiebert, $300 per hour for Butha, and $100 per hour for Vrieze. RRS challenged the rates for Schwiebert and Butha but did not challenge Vrieze’s rate.

The court found Schwiebert’s and Butha’s rates reasonable. It relied on evidence of their experience, comparable fee awards in other Fair Debt Collection Practices Act cases in the district, and the court’s knowledge of prevailing local rates. The court did not reduce the requested hourly rates.

Hours Expended

The court focused on 49.25 attorney hours because RRS did not challenge the 1.5 hours of paralegal work. The court rejected RRS’s argument that 2.2 hours billed by Butha for reviewing court electronic-filing correspondence were excessive or necessarily clerical.

The court agreed, however, that the attorneys had spent too much time on legal research and communications. Schwiebert and Butha spent 17.6 hours on legal research even though Schwiebert had extensive experience with these cases and the complaint involved one legally simple claim. The billing records also showed at least 11.35 hours of communications between the attorneys and with Beckler, which the court found excessive given the case’s factual simplicity and early settlement.

The court also concluded that the nearly 50 attorney hours billed were more than twice the hours approved in similar cases. It therefore reduced Schwiebert’s and Butha’s claimed hours by 50 percent. The court did not reduce the paralegal hours.

Disposition

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright granted in part and denied in part Beckler’s motion for attorney fees and costs. The court awarded $9,480 in reasonable attorney fees under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3), allocated as follows:

- $5,827.50 to Darren B. Schwiebert; - $3,577.50 to John Butha; and - $150.00 to Mary Vrieze.

The court ordered judgment to be entered accordingly.