Opinion
Civil Action No. 96-1052-BH-M.
September 20, 2000.
JUDGMENT
It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that plaintiffs' motion for an award of attorneys' fees and costs, as supplemented, be and is hereby GRANTED and that JUDGMENT therefore be entered in favor of the plaintiffs, Dean Butch Wilson, et al., and against the defendant, the Dallas County Commission, in the sum $444,203.29, representing the attorneys' fees and expenses set forth in the following charts:
ATTORNEYS' FEE AWARD
Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Hourly Hours Fee Brandt Attorneys Rate Award Albert L. Jordan $225.00 712.00 $157,562.50 Algert S. Agricola, Jr. $225.00 738.75 $163,646.25 Charles B. Campbell $150.00 258.00 $38,700.00 Michael L. Jackson $150.00 61.20 $9,164.25 Paralegals $65.00 96.15 $6,249.75 Law Clerks $65.00 68.25 $4,436.25 TOTAL FEE AWARD $379,759.00 Johnston Druhan Hourly Rate Hours Fee Award Attorneys J. Michael Druhan $250.00 141.50 $35,375.00EXPENSES AWARDED
Expenses Awarded Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Brandt Firm $27,561.95 Johnston Druhan Firm $1,507.34 This judgment shall bear interest at the legal rate of 6.241% from the date of said judgment.ORDER
The Court will now address plaintiffs' motion for an award of attorneys' fees and costs (Doc. 138), as supplemented (Docs. 183 through 190; 221 through 223; and 229 through 231) as well as plaintiffs' motion (Doc. 235) to tax plaintiffs' portion of the fee paid to the Court's experts pursuant to this Court's Order of June 28, 2000 (Doc. 227) as costs and plaintiffs' notice of filing appellate attorneys' fees petition (Doc. 237). The defendant W. A. Kynard, in his official capacity as Circuit Court Clerk of Dallas County, asserted at the outset, in response to plaintiffs' motion and the Court's Order of September 16, 1999 (Doc. 181), that he should not be liable for any fees or costs because he is merely a relief party in this action. See, Docs. 142 and 193. The United States asserted no position with regard to plaintiffs' motion inasmuch as plaintiffs do not seek fees from the United States. See, United States Response (Doc. 154). It is the Dallas County Commission defendants alone who object in part to plaintiffs' motion.
Defendants Erskine Minor, Carolyn Varner as successor to Perry Varner. Roy Moore, Kimbrough Ballard and Curtis Williams, who in their official capacities now comprise the Dallas County Commission are hereafter referred to collectively as the "Dallas County Commission" or "Commission" defendants. The Commission's motion (Doc. 225) to substitute Carolyn Varner for Perry Varner is hereby GRANTED.
It has not been, and cannot be, disputed that plaintiffs are prevailing parties and thus entitled to an award of attorneys' fees. An award of attorneys' fees to the prevailing party is authorized "[i]n any action or proceeding to enforce the voting guarantees of the fourteenth or fifteenth amendment." 42 U.S.C. § 19731(e). The judgment entered by this Court on March 29, 1999, was affirmed by the Eleventh Circuit on August 4, 2000, although a mandate has not yet issued. Thus the plaintiffs have satisfied the first step in the process. The Court agrees that defendant W. A. Kynard, in his official capacity as Circuit Court Clerk of Dallas County, is merely a relief party in this action and shall not be liable for plaintiffs' fees and expenses. The Dallas County Commission defendants shall alone be liable for such fees.
The second step involves the calculation of the "lodestar" which is "the number of hours (tempered by billing judgment) spent in the legal work on the case, multiplied by a reasonable market rate in the local area." Dillard v. City of Greensboro, 213 F.3d 1347, 1353 (11th Cir. 2000), citing, ACLU v. Barnes, 168 F.3d 423, 427 (11th Cir. 1999), and Duckworth v. Whisenant, 97 F.3d 1393, 1396 (11th Cir. 1996).
HOURLY RATE
The Dallas County Commission defendants have not objected to the hourly rate charged for the legal work performed in this case and the plaintiffs have submitted ample support for their contention that the following rates constitute "the reasonable market rate" in the applicable area:
The hourly rate charged for the legal work at issue has been endorsed not only by plaintiffs' counsel, Albert L. Jordan (Doc. 185), Algert S. Agricola, Jr. (Doc. 186) and J. Michael Druhan, Jr. (Doc. 188), but by Raymond P. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Esquire (Doc. 187), Roderick P. Stout, Esquire (Doc. 189), and T. Dudley Perry, Esquire (Doc. 190).
COMPENSABLE HOURS
The Court has also carefully considered the hours expended by plaintiffs' counsel as set forth below. The Court will first address the hours expended on all aspects of the case except the hours expended in connection with the plaintiffs' fee petition. The Court will then address the hours claimed in connection with the work performed on the fee petition. The hours expended on all but the fee petition include the following:
Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Hours through Subsequent TOTAL Brandt Attorneys Oct. 15, 1999 Hours HOURS Albert L. Jordan 699.50 10.00 709.50 Algert S. Agricola, Jr. 668.10 46.90 715.00 Charles B. Campbell 258.00 258.00 Michael L. Jackson 15.30 14.30 29.60 Paralegals 96.15 96.15 Law Clerks 68.25 68.25 Johnston Druhan Hours through Subsequent TOTAL Attorneys Oct. 15, 1999 Hours HOURS J. Michael Druhan, Jr. 124.50 17.00 141.50 The only objection made by the Dallas County Commission defendants to the fees requested relate to certain of the hours claimed by plaintiffs' counsel. Specifically, the Dallas County Commission only challenged eighty-three (83) hours expended by Albert L. Jordan, twenty-nine (29) hours expended by Algert S. Agricola, Jr., thirty-six (36) hours expended by Charles B. Campbell, and one and four tenth's (1.4) of an hour expended by one of the Paralegals employed by the Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Brandt firm. The sole basis for this challenge is that "Plaintiffs' fees appear not to be reasonable because most of the work claimed was recycled work from other federal court cases in which the attorneys for Plaintiffs were contemporaneously involved, or had been previously involved." Dallas County Commission's Response (Doc. 194) at 1. The Court has, however, carefully examined the documents submitted by the Dallas County Commission and the items challenged and is not satisfied that the ability "to transfer the fruits of research and writing from one case to another" ( Id. at 2) renders the hours expended in this action by plaintiffs' counsel per se unreasonable. In point of fact, the Court finds nothing redundant, excessive or unreasonable about the time expended by plaintiffs' counsel. The quality of their work evidences the diligence with which they applied the legal principles at issue to the unique facts of this case and the arguments of each of the defendants at every stage of the litigation. The Commission defendants have failed to assert more than mere speculation that plaintiffs' counsel have somehow attempted to charge twice for the same work. Consequently, the objections of the Dallas County Commission defendants to the aforementioned hours expended by plaintiffs' counsel are without merit and are hereby OVERRULED.In addition to the above, plaintiffs seek compensation for the hours specifically expended in connection with the preparation of the fee petition:
Wallace Jordan, Ratliff Hours through Subsequent TOTAL Brandt Attorneys Oct. 15, 1999 Hours HOURS Albert L. Jordan .50 2.00 2.50 AlgertS Agricola, Jr. 8.10 15.65 23.75 Michael L. Jackson 17.30 14.30 31.60 No objections have been raised to these hours or counsel's compensation for same and the Court concludes as well that they are reasonable under the circumstances.EXPENSES
In addition, the plaintiffs' have requested the payment of certain expenses and no objections have been made to the out-of-pocket costs claimed in counsel's affidavits. Upon its own independent review, the Court finds nothing unreasonable or excessive about the expenses incurred. The expenses at issue which the Court now approves include:
Expenses through Expenses to TOTAL Oct. 15, 1999 Date EXPENSES Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Brandt Firm $27,470.19 $91.76 $27,561.95 Johnston Druhan Firm $1,367.82 $139.52 $1,507.34 The plaintiffs have also filed a motion (Doc. 235) to tax as costs plaintiffs' portion of the fee paid to the Court's experts pursuant to this Court's Order of June 28, 2000, namely $6,599.25. Upon consideration of this motion, the Court concludes that it is due to be denied. The plaintiffs' inability to propose a constitutionally acceptable districting plan was as equally responsible for the necessity to appoint the experts at issue as was the defendants' failure to devise such a plan. Although the Court will not diminish the attorneys' fee award by any hours expended in connection with counsel's efforts to submit a plan on the grounds that the effort was unsuccessful, the Court does not believe that any allocation of plaintiffs' portion of the expert fees to the Dallas County Commission defendants would be just under the circumstances.For the reasons set forth above, the Court concludes and it is therefore ORDERED as follows:
1. Plaintiffs' motion (Doc. 235) to tax as costs plaintiffs' portion of the fee paid to the Court's experts pursuant to this Court's Order of June 28, 2000, namely $6,599.25, be and is hereby DENIED.
2. Plaintiffs' motion for an award of attorneys' fees and costs (Doc. 138), as supplemented (Docs. 183 through 190; 221 through 223; and 229 through 231), be and is hereby GRANTED in that:
a). Plaintiffs' counsel are hereby awarded the following fees:
Due to an error in the computer generated calculations which produced the initial itemized time sheets for the Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Brandt attorneys, Albert L. Jordan's fee for the first 699.50 hours he expended were billed at $221.22 per hours resulting in a fee request that was $2,637.50 less than Mr. Jordan was entitled to receive. Mr. Jordan has orally advised the Court that he will waive that sum inasmuch as he did not timely discover the error.
Similarly, due to the aforementioned error in the computer generated calculations which produced the initial itemized time sheets for the Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Brandt attorneys, Algert S. Agricola's fee for the first 668.10 hours he expanded were billed at $220.73 per hours resulting in a fee request that was $2,572.50 less than Mr. Agricola was entitled to receive. Mr. Agricola has orally advised the Court that he will similarly waive that sum.
Again, due to the aforementioned error in the computer generated calculations which produced the initial itemized timesheets for the Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff Brandt attorneys, Michael L. Jackson's fee for the first 15.30 hours he expended were billed at $148.97 per hours resulting in a fee request that was only $15.75 less than Mt. Jackson was entitled to receive but he has orally advised the Court that he will waive that sum.
4. With respect to plaintiffs' appellate attorneys' fee petition now pending in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the Court will, when required, address any matters which are remanded and not otherwise compromised by the parties.