Opinion
Civil No. 10-6327-AA
09-30-2011
FIRST-CITIZENS BANK & TRUST COMPANY, successor in interest to Temecula Valley Bank, a North Carolina banking corporation, Plaintiff, v, WHITSELL MANUFACTURING, INC., an Oregon corporation; LANE COUNTY ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION; JOHN C. BUSS, an individual; LAKESIDE LUMBER PRODUCTS, INC., an Arizona corporation; COMMERCIAL EQUIPMENT LEASE, an Oregon corporation; THOMAS C. WHITSELL, an individual; WALTER F. WHITSELL, an individual; BONNIE M. PARMENTER, an individual; WOOD PRODUCTS TRANSPORT, INC., an Oregon corporation; and WHITSELL INVESTMENTS, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, Defendants.
ORDER
AIKEN, Chief Judge:
On October 8, 2010, plaintiff First-Citizens Bank and Trust Company filed this action, based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, seeking to foreclose on defendant Whitsell Manufacturing's deed of trust and to on personal guarantees given by Whitsell Manufacturing, Inc., Thomas C. Whitsell, Walter F. Whitsell, Bonnie M. Parmenter, Wood Products Transport, Inc., and Whitsell Investments, LLC (collectively "defendants").
to respond to plaintiff's complaint. Accordingly, on March 18, 2011, this Court granted plaintiff's motion for entry of default against defendants. Subsequently, this Court entered a Judgement of Foreclosure and Money Award against defendants, jointly and severally, in the principal amount of $801,153.16.
Plaintiff now moves for an award of attorney fees and costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P, 54 and the specific terms of the parties' promissory note, deed of trust, and commercial guarantees. Plaintiff requests fees in the amount of $17,331.00 and costs in the amount of $1672.83. In accordance with the federal and local rules, plaintiff has submitted a detailed affidavit authenticating the amount of fees and costs requested.
Defendants concede that plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees, but dispute the amount claimed. Because defendants did not file a response to plaintiff's motion, it is unclear which portions of those fees are contested, whether it be the reasonableness of the time spent or the hourly rates charged. Defendants are silent as to plaintiff's bill of costs, therefore, the Court presumes that defendants do not dispute plaintiff's costs.
As such, the only issue before this Court is the amount of attorney fees to be awarded in this case. Under Oregon law, attorney fee awards are governed by Or. Rev. Stat. § 20.075, which sets forth several factors a court "shall consider" both in determining whether fees should be awarded and the reasonable amount of those fees. See Smith v. Guideone Mutual Ins. Co., 336 Fed.Appx. 607, 609 (9th Cir, 2009) (affirming the application of Or. Rev. Stat. § 20.075 to determine the amount of attorney fees in a diversity case, wherein fees were requested pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54).
After reviewing plaintiff's submissions regarding its hours and rates, the most recent Oregon State Economic Survey, and the factors outlined in Or. Rev. Stat. § 20.750, this Court finds plaintiff's request to be reasonable. The amount of fees sought are only two percent of the underlying judgment against defendants; and the hourly rate of Mr. Mann, while on the high end of the economic survey, reflects nearly twenty years of litigation experience.
Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for attorney fees and costs (doc. 33) is GRANTED. Therefore, defendants shall pay attorney fees in the amount of $17,331.00 and costs in the amount of $1672.83.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Ann Aiken
United States District Judge