Opinion
Civil Action No. DKC 12-0260
02-15-2013
GORDON LIPPE v. TJML, LLC, et al.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 4, 2013, Plaintiff filed a status report stipulating to the dismissal of any unresolved causes of action and requesting the court enter final judgment. (ECF No. 16). Plaintiff also requests that the court award him attorney's fees, costs, and post-judgment interest, and offers to provide a more detailed schedule of the amounts sought, as contemplated by Local Rule 109 and Appendix B to the Local Rules. Defendant Massenburg has not responded.
1. Attorney's Fees
In his prior request for attorney's fees, Plaintiff sought a total of $27,601.75 in attorney's fees. (ECF No. 11).
Reasonable attorney's fees are mandatory under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). Likewise, Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. §§ 3-507.2(b)(1) & 3-427(d) provide that the court may award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing employee. In making that assessment, courts typically "use the principles of the traditional lodestar method as a guide." Poulin v. Gen. Dynamics Shared Res., No. 09-00058, 2010 WL 1813497, at *1 (W.D.Va. May 5, 2010) (quoting Almodova v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, No. 07-00378, 2010 WL 1372298, at *7 (D.Hawai'i Mar. 31, 2010)). The lodestar amount is calculated by multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended by a reasonable hourly rate. Robinson v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, 560 F.3d 235, 243 (4th Cir. 2009); Plyler v. Evatt, 902 F.2d 273, 277 (4th Cir. 1990) ("In addition to the attorney's own affidavits, the fee applicant must produce satisfactory specific evidence of the prevailing market rates in the relevant community for the type of work for which he seeks an award") (citations omitted).
Appendix B to this court's Local Rules, Rules and Guidance for Determining Attorneys' Fees in Certain Cases, advises that $275-400 is a reasonable hourly fee for "[l]awyers admitted to the bar for fifteen (15) years or more," and $95-115 is a reasonable hourly fee for "[p]aralegals and law clerks." Loc. R. App'x B, at 3.d, e (footnote omitted). Plaintiff's counsel Timothy Romberger declares, under penalty of perjury, that both he and his co-counsel, Sharon Donahue, have been practicing law for over fifteen years. (ECF No. 11-3, at 2). Given their experience, the requested $325 per hour is a reasonable rate and below what they might charge. Additionally, a rate of $115 per hour is a reasonable rate for a paralegal working on the case.
In their time sheet, counsel assert that they and Ms. Donahue's paralegal collectively devoted 86.35 hours to this litigation. The 86.35 hours (84.15 attorney hours and 2.2 paralegal hours) included time for background and case development, pleadings, client communication, drafting motions, and preparing documents. Local Rule 109(b) requires Plaintiff's request be
supported by a memorandum setting forth the nature of the case, the claims as to which the party prevailed, the claims as to which the party did not prevail, a detailed description of the work performed broken down by hours or fractions thereof expended on each task, the attorney's customary fee for such like work, the customary fee for like work prevailing in the attorney's community, a listing of any expenditures for which reimbursement is sought, any additional factors which are required by the case law, and any additional factors that the attorney wishes to bring to the Court's attention.Additionally, Appendix B to the Local Rules requires the fee application to be broken down by both task and litigation phase. Mr. Romberger's declaration does not meet these requirements. Rather, he simply submits total hours worked. Accordingly, Plaintiff will be instructed to provide a more detailed account of his attorney's fees, in accordance with the Local Rule 109 and Appendix B to the Local Rules.
2. Costs
Plaintiff also previously requested that the court award costs, specifically, $350 for the court filing fee, and $110 for the service of process fees for the defaulted Defendants. (ECF No. 11). These costs are supported by invoices attached to Plaintiff's motion. Under the FLSA, "the costs that may be charged to losing defendants include 'those reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the attorney which are normally charged to a fee-paying client, in the course of providing legal services.'" Lopez v. Lawns 'R' Us, No. 07-2979, 2008 WL 2227353, at *7 (D.Md. May 23, 2008) (finding a $350 filing fee and a $200 service process fee to be "well within the categories of normal and necessary costs of litigation that would normally be charged to paying clients"). Therefore, Plaintiff has shown that he has incurred costs of $460, and his request is reasonable.
3. Post-Judgment Interest
The court need not specifically grant an award of post-judgment interest because Plaintiff is entitled to recover such interest by operation of law. See 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) ("Interest shall be allowed on any money judgment in a civil case recovered in a district court.").
Accordingly, it is this 15th day of February, 2013, by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff Gordon Lippe's claims for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act as to all Defendants, bonus owed to Plaintiff under the Fair Labor Standards Act as to Defendant Tony Massenburg, and for quantum meruit as to all Defendants, BE, and the same hereby ARE, DISMISSED;
2. Judgment BE, and the same hereby IS, ENTERED in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants Tony Massenburg, TJML, LLC t/a Tony & James Restaurant and Bar and Journeyman, LLC t/a 44 Sports Bar & Grill, jointly and severally, for costs in the amount of $460;
3. Plaintiff is directed to submit a supplemental fee petition, in proper form, within fourteen (14) days;
4. The clerk is directed to transmit copies of the foregoing Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel for the parties and directly to Defendant Massenburg.
____________________
DEBORAH K. CHASANOW
United States District Judge