Defense ADA Lawyer Sanctioned $3253.75

United States District Court,C.D. California.

Faustino AMBAOSIO, Plaintiff,

v.

TACO JOES, Jack Murphy, Leona Murphy, and Diana Covarrubias, Defendants.

No. EDCV04259GPSSGLX.

June 15, 2005.

Roy L. Landers, Roy L. Landers Law Offices, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff.

Alan H. Boon, Berger Kahn, Irvine, CA, David W. Peters, Lawyers Against Lawsuit Abuse, San Diego, CA, for Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES

LARSON, Magistrate J.

*1 In the course of granting plaintiff's motion for discovery and motion to compel discovery, the Court on April 4, 2005, awarded to plaintiff and against defendants the costs plaintiff incurred in filing the two motions. The Court has received the parties papers on this issue and now makes the following finding.

In his declaration and summary of attorney's fees and costs he has submitted, plaintiff's counsel seeks to recover $4,497.50. This amount is predicated upon incurring 9.95 hours of time reviewing and drafting the motions and discovery responses, travel time (including $20 for gasoline), and court appearances at an hourly billable rate of $450. The only objection proffered by defendants to plaintiff's fee request is that plaintiff has failed to proffer any evidence, competent or otherwise, demonstrating that the $450 hourly rate is “in line with those prevailing in the community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation.” (Opp. At 1-2). In response, plaintiff's counsel submitted a declaration with accompanying attachments demonstrating that other lawyers in California with comparable skill and expertise as plaintiff's counsel charge anywhere from “$150 an hour to $400,” notes that other attorneys who litigate ADA suits in the San Diego area where he works have been awarded fees “in the amount of $325 or more,” and requests that the Court award him fees at the rate of somewhere between “$300-$450” as being “reasonable.” (Decl. Roy Landers ¶ ¶  7, 9). Defendants have not challenged the reasonableness or the evidentiary sufficiency of the rates or information contained in plaintiff counsel's reply. Rather, they simply protest the late in the day aspect to which that information was provided to the Court. (Defs' Surreply at 1-3).

With no objection to the reasonableness or evidentiary sufficiency of the rates listed in plaintiff counsel's reply declaration, the Court finds that an hourly rate of $325 is reasonable. Plaintiff's counsel himself observed that other attorneys who perform the same type of work as himself have been awarded that hourly rate, and the evidence proffered by defendants in their opposition would certainly support such an hourly rate. Specifically, the Court is referring to Exhibit A to Mr. Peters' declaration in which he provides the hourly rates for attorneys in his former law firm in San Diego for the year 2002. In particular, the Court notes that at least nine of Mr. Peters' former colleagues charged hourly rates exceeding $300, and, in fact, three of them charged in excess of $350 an hour.

With an hourly rate of $325, the Court hereby awards plaintiff and against defendants $3253.75 in fees and costs incurred in filing the two discovery motions. Payment is to be made within fifteen (15) days of the date of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.