Opinion
Civil No. 2005-11.
February 6, 2008
David H. Staples, Pro se. Marja Staples, Pro se. J. Daryl Dodson, Esq. St. Thomas, U.S.V.I., For defendants Ruyter Bay Land Partners, LLC; Ruyter Bay Land Investors, LLC; Mikael Van Loon; Stephen Stranahan; Charles Salisbury; Grant Hathaway; and Frank Murray. Gregory H. Hodges, Esq., Justin K. Holcombe, Esq., St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. For defendant The Nature Conservancy.
ORDER
Before the Court is the motion of defendant The Nature Conservancy (the "Conservancy") for an award of attorneys' fees and costs. Pro se plaintiffs David H. Staples and Marja Staples (the "Staples") are owners of lots at Sprat Bay Estates on Water Island, U.S. Virgin Islands, and are members of the Sprat Bay Homeowners Association, Inc. (the "SBHOA"). The Staples commenced this action in February, 2005, alleging that the SBHOA had caused them financial harm by violating certain covenants relating to the payment of maintenance dues. The Conservancy moved for summary judgment against the Staples. In support of its motion, the Conservancy relied on another action the Staples had initiated in this Court in July, 2003. The defendants in that action were granted summary judgment against the Staples. In its motion for summary judgment in the February, 2005 action, the Conservancy argued that both actions were substantially the same, and thus that the claims in the above-captioned action were barred by the doctrine of res judicata, also known as claim preclusion. The Court granted the Conservancy's motion. The Staples thereafter sought reconsideration of the Court's ruling. That motion was denied. The Conservancy now seeks $5,434.50 in attorneys' fees and costs.
( See Mem. Op. and J., Dec. 10, 2007.)
( See Mem. Op. and Order, Jan. 2, 2008.)
The Conservancy did not attach a detailed billing report to its motion. The Staples filed an opposition, correctly asserting that such a lack of detail is fatal to a motion for attorneys' fees. The Conservancy thereafter filed a reply to the Staples opposition, and attached such a report. The Court sua sponte granted the Staples leave of Court to file a sur-reply to the Conservancy's reply. In their sur-reply, the Staples cite news articles that discuss investigations into the Convervancy's land deals. Those news articles in no way bear upon a motion for attorneys' fees. The Staples also assert that the Conservancy's attorneys' fees are unreasonable. The Court agrees to some extent with that assertion, and, as discussed below, will deduct some of the fees claimed by the Conservancy.
The Virgin Islands Code allows for the recovery of attorneys' fees and costs:
(1) Fees of officers, witnesses, and jurors;
(2) Necessary expenses of taking depositions which were reasonably necessary in the action;
(3) Expenses of publication of the summons or notices, and the postage when they are served by mail;
(4) Compensation of a master as provided in Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;
(5) Necessary expense of copying any public record, book, or document used as evidence in the trial; and
(6) Attorney's fees as provided in subsection (b) of this section.
V.I. CODE ANN. tit. 5, § 541(a) (1986). The statute further provides: "there shall be allowed to the prevailing party in the judgment such sums as the court in its discretion may fix by way of indemnity for his attorney's fees in maintaining the action or defenses thereto. . . ." Id. at (b).
To determine a fair and reasonable award of attorneys' fees, the Court considers factors including the time and labor involved, skill required, customary charges for similar services, benefits obtained from the service and the certainty of compensation. Lempert v. Singer, Civ. No. 1990-200, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19923, at *5 (D.V.I. Dec. 30, 1993; see also Morcher v. Nash, 32 F. Supp. 2d 239, 241 (D.V.I. 1998). Reasonable attorneys' fees may include charges for work that was "useful and of a type ordinarily necessary to secure the final result obtained from the litigation." Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546, 561 (1986); see also Gulfstream III Associates, Inc. v. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., 995 F.2d 414, 420 (3d Cir. 1993) (noting that reasonable attorneys' fees may include charges for measures necessary to enforce district court judgments as well as other charges "reasonably expended" to advance the litigation).
Applying the standard outlined above, the Court finds that some of the $5,434.50 in attorneys' fees claimed by the Conservancy was reasonably expended. However, the Court also finds that several items were not reasonable.
For instance, the Conservancy requests reimbursement for conferences and communications between their own attorneys and legal staff. Such expenses are duplicative, and not to be included in assessments of reasonable fees. See Morcher, 32 F. Supp. 2d at 241-42 ("Multiple lawyer conferences, not involving opposing counsel . . . involve duplicative work.").
The Conservancy also requests reimbursement for time anticipated to defend this fee petition. However, attorney's fees are awarded on the basis of time spent on the case, not that which is anticipated and may not be realized.
Finally, the Court notes that this matter involved ordinary breach of contract and fraud claims, and was disposed of on a motion for summary judgment based on claim preclusion. The issues were not novel, but, rather, "relatively commonplace." See, e.g., Good Timez, Inc. v. Phoenix Fire Marine Ins. Co., 754 F. Supp. 459, 463 (D.V.I. 1991) ("In computing what is a reasonable award of attorney's fees in a particular case, the court should consider, among other things, the novelty and complexity of the issues presented in that case.") (citing Lindy Bros. Builders v. American Radiator Standard Sanitary Corp., 487 F.2d 161, 168 (3d Cir. 1973)). Consequently, the Court finds that only $2,000 in attorneys' fees was reasonably expended. See, e.g., Home Depot, U.S.A. v. Bohlke Int'l Airways, Civ. No. 1998-102, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6935, at *1-2 (D.V.I. Apr. 30, 2001) ("The decision whether to award attorneys' fees to a prevailing party is entirely within the Court's discretion.") (citation omitted).
For the reasons stated above, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Staples shall reimburse the Conservancy for attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $2,000.