Perez v. World Financial Group

Opinion

3 * * *

4 FAYE D. PEREZ, Case No. 2:21-cv-00287-RFB-EJY

5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.

8 Defendant.

9 10 Pending before the Court is World Financial Group’s Memorandum of Attorney’s Fees. ECF 11 No. 49. The Memorandum was filed on July 28, 2022. No response to the Memorandum was filed 12 by Plaintiff. Preceding this Memorandum, the Court entered an Order granting Defendant’s Motion 13 to Compel. ECF No. 48. In that Order, the Court required Plaintiff to make her initial disclosures 14 in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 no later than July 21, 2022. The Court further Ordered Plaintiff 15 to pay Defendant its reasonable fees and costs incurred in bringing and succeeding on its Motion to 16 Compel. 17 Through its Memorandum, Defendant seeks a total award of $4,707.68 in fees. No costs are 18 sought. The fees are based on three hours of time entered by counsel Nicole True, billed at the 19 hourly rate of $340; 12.8 hours of time entered by Brooks Brennan, billed at the hourly rate of 20 $241.20; and 1.4 hours of time entered by attorney Ed Barkel, billed at the hourly rate of $428.80. 21 The U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada has adopted the hybrid lodestar/multiplier 22 approach used by the Supreme Court in Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983), as the proper 23 method for determining the amount of attorney’s fees due in most actions. The lodestar/multiplier 24 approach has two parts. First, a court determines the “lodestar” amount by multiplying the number 25 of hours reasonably expended on the litigation by a reasonable hourly rate. Id. at 433. The party 26 seeking an award of fees must submit evidence supporting the hours worked and the rates claimed. 27 Id. The district court will generally exclude from the lodestar amount hours that are not reasonably 1 || adjust the lodestar upward or downward using a “multiplier” based on factors not subsumed in tl 2 || mutial calculation of the lodestar. Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 898-901 (1984). 3 The time billed by Mr. Barkel represents consultation with other attorneys in his offi 4 || assigned to this case. Internal consultation will not be included in the fees awarded. Thus, $600.: 5 || will be deducted from the fee award ($428.80 x 1.4). Otherwise, the Court finds the time billed a1 6 || the rates charged are commensurate with the work performed by counsel for Defendant and tl 7 || experience of those counsel as evaluated through the lens of the Las Vegas legal community. 8 Accordingly, 9 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that World Financial Group’s Memorandum of Attorney’s Fe 10 || (ECF No. 49), docketed as a motion, is GRANTED. 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that World Financial Group 1s awarded fees in the amount. 12 || $4,107.36. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may pay fees in the amount of $4,107.36 to Wor 14 || Financial Group no later than September 19, 2022, unless an objection to this Order is filed in whi 15 |} case the Order is stayed until the objection is resolved. 16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that failure to comply with this Order may result in tl 17 || imposition of additional sanctions. 18 Dated this 12th day of August, 2022. 19 20 PAYNE ad 2 | UNITEL.STATES MAG TE JUDGE

22 23 24 25 26 27 28