Opinion
3:22-cv-00721-HZ
02-19-2024
CHRISTOPHER GARZA, an individual, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SALEM, an Oregon municipal corporation; and OFFICER DAVID BAKER, an individual, Defendants.
ORDER
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge
Plaintiff Christopher Garza moves for an award of attorney fees and costs as the prevailing party. ECF 106, 107. The parties have filed a stipulation regarding costs and fees. ECF 125. The Court taxes costs against Defendants and awards Plaintiff attorney fees as adjusted below.
Plaintiff brought claims for excessive force and false arrest under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Baker, and state-law claims for false arrest and battery against the City of Salem. Compl., ECF 1. The Court granted summary judgment to Defendant Baker on the federal false arrest claim based on qualified immunity, and the other three claims proceeded to trial. The jury returned a verdict for Plaintiff on all three claims. ECF 97. Judgment was entered on December 14, 2023. ECF 105. Plaintiff timely moved for an award of attorney fees, taxable costs, and nontaxable costs. On January 11, 2024, the parties filed a proposed stipulated order stating that Plaintiff is entitled to $3,712.63 in taxable costs, $5,992.67 in non-taxable costs, and $171,323.75 in attorney fees. ECF 125.
Plaintiff's taxable costs are recoverable, and the Court therefore awards Plaintiff $3,712.63 in taxable costs. Plaintiff's non-taxable costs are also recoverable because the Ninth Circuit has indicated that district courts have the authority to award non-taxable costs to the prevailing party when that party prevails under a statute that provides for reasonable attorney fees. Grove v. Wells Fargo Fin. California, Inc., 606 F.3d 577, 580 (9th Cir. 2010) (so holding for the Fair Credit Reporting Act). Plaintiff seeks to recover the costs of obtaining his medical records and obtaining Realtime transcripts of the trial proceedings. Pl. Mot. Fees 2-3. Plaintiff may recover these costs as part of an attorney fee award under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b). The Court therefore awards Plaintiff $5,992.67 in non-taxable costs.
Plaintiff initially sought $181,323.75 in attorney fees. Pl. Mot. Fees 2. The parties later stipulated that the fees sought should be reduced by $10,000 because Defendant Baker prevailed on Plaintiff's federal false arrest claim on summary judgment. ECF 125. See Op. & Ord. 23, ECF 52 (holding that Defendant Baker was entitled to qualified immunity on the federal false arrest claim). The fees sought must be further reduced by $300 because Plaintiff improperly seeks to recover fees for time spent communicating with the media. Attorney Jason Kafoury's hours include $210 in attorney fees for speaking to the media about the case in May 2022. J. Kafoury Decl. Ex. 1 at 1, ECF 110. And paralegal Laurie Osborn's hours include $90 in fees for uploading documents to give to the media. Osborn Decl. Ex. 1 at 2, ECF 113. Those fees are not recoverable. See Gates v. Gomez, 60 F.3d 525, 535 (9th Cir. 1995), as amended (Aug. 3, 1995) (holding that district court abused its discretion in awarding attorney fees for media contact because it is an activity “that attorneys generally do at their own expense”). Plaintiff is therefore entitled to $171,023.75 in attorney fees.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Bill of Costs [106]. The clerk is instructed to tax costs against Defendants in the amount of $3,712.63. Based on the parties' stipulation [125], the Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees [107]. Plaintiff is awarded $171,023.75 in attorney fees and $5,992.67 in non-taxable costs.
IT IS SO ORDERED.