Opinion
1:21-cv-22112-KMM
03-14-2022
CARLOS BRITO, Plaintiff, v. SARRIA HOLDINGS IV, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER
K. MICHAEL MOORE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff Carlos Brito's (“Plaintiff”) Verified Application for Reasonable Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Expert Fees. (“Mot.”) (ECF No. 29). The Court referred the matter to the Honorable Lauren F. Louis, United States Magistrate Judge, for “a report and recommendation to determine the amount of reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and litigation expenses to which Plaintiff is entitled” from defaulting Defendant Helados Del Tropico Corp. (ECF No. 34) at 7. On February 25, 2022, Magistrate Judge Louis issued a Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff's Verified Application for Reasonable Attorney's Fees, Expert Fees, and Costs (“Report and Recommendation”), recommending that Plaintiff's Motion be granted in part. (ECF No. 43). No. objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed and the time to do so has passed. The matter is now ripe for review.
The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3).
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205, 28 U.S.C. § 1920, and Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff seeks to recover attorney's fees in the amount of $6,150.00 for 13.20 hours of work at a rate of $450.00 per hour, fees for work undertaken by a paralegal in the amount of $210.00 for 1.40 hours of work at a rate of $150.00 per hour, fees incurred by Plaintiff's expert in the amount of $2,787.50, and costs in the amount of $442.00. R&R at 3.
As set forth in the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Louis first found that the $450.00 hourly rate requested for attorney's was excessive in light of $350.00 hourly rates awarded in similar ADA cases that proceeded to default judgment, such as this case, including at least one case where Plaintiff's counsel was counsel of record. Id. at 5-7. Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Louis found that a rate of $350.00 per hour was reasonable for the work incurred by Plaintiff's counsel in this case. Id. at 7.
Second, Magistrate Judge Louis found that the 13.20 hours billed by Plaintiff's counsel was more than what was reasonably incurred for the work performed. Id. at 7-9. For example, Magistrate Judge Louis noted that Plaintiff's counsel billed 1.20 hours of time to draft a two-page motion for entry of default that is nearly a verbatim copy an analogous motion in another case, among other deficiencies. Id. at 8 (citing Munoz v. Calle, No. 21-20448-CIV, ECF No. 14 (S.D. Fla.)). Thus, Magistrate Judge Louis found that a 50 percent reduction in the hours claimed by Plaintiff's counsel, amounting to 6.60 hours, was warranted to account for the billing deficiencies identified in the Report and Recommendation. Id. at 9.
Third, Magistrate Judge Louis found that Plaintiff was not entitled to fees for work performed by Plaintiff's counsel's paralegal, because the fees requested for that paralegal's work related to unrecoverable clerical tasks. Id. at 10.
Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that Plaintiff be awarded a total of $2,310.00 in attorney's fees, representing 6.60 hours of attorney time billed at the rate of $350.00 per hour. Id.
As to expert fees and costs, Plaintiff requests $2,787.50 in expert fees and $442.00 in costs, for a total of $3,229.50 in costs and expenses. Id. at 10. Magistrate Judge Louis found that Plaintiff is entitled to expert fees in the amount of $2,162.50 because the documentation prepared by Plaintiff s expert was necessary and related to the litigation. Id. However, Magistrate Judge Louis found warranted a reduction in the expert's billed time by 2.50 hours for time spent uploading and downloading photos, setting up folders to organize photos, and resizing photos, all billed at a rate of $250.00 per hour. Id. at 11 n.3. Last, Magistrate Judge Louis found that Plaintiff was entitled to $442.00 in costs, representing the $402.00 filing fee in this case and the $40.00 fee for service of process. Id. at 11.
Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that Plaintiff be awarded a total of $2,162.50 in expert fees and $442.00 in costs. Id.
This Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Louis's findings and recommendations.
Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the Report and Recommendation, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Magistrate Judge Louis's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 43) is ADOPTED. Consistent with Magistrate Judge Louis's Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff Carlos Brito's Verified Application for Reasonable Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Expert Fees is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff Carlos Brito shall recover from Defendant Helados Del Tropico Corp. $2,310.00 in attorney's fees, $2,162.50 in expert fees, and $442.00 in costs.