Goldberg v. Central Credit Managment, Inc.
Filing
18
ORDER Granting 17 Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff Todd Goldberg and against Defendant Central Credit Management, Inc. in the amount of $865.00 for attorney's fees and costs. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 2/27/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
TODD GOLDBERG,
Case No. 2:11-cv-00305-MMD-GWF
Plaintiff,
10
ORDER
v.
11
12
CENTRAL CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC.,
(Plf.’s Motion for Default Judgment
– dkt. no. 17)
Defendant.
13
14
15
I.
SUMMARY
16
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs. (Dkt. no. 17.)
17
Defendant Central Credit Management, Inc. has not responded. For the reasons stated
18
below, the Motion is granted.
19
II.
BACKGROUND
20
This suit arises from the attempts at collecting an alleged debt and violations of
21
the FDCPA. On December 4, 2012, this Court entered default judgment in favor of the
22
Plaintiff and gave the Plaintiff thirty (30) days from the entry of judgment to file a motion
23
for attorneys’ fees and costs. Plaintiff timely filed the instant motion.
24
III.
LEGAL STANDARD
25
Entry of default judgment on Plaintiff’s FDCPA claim entitles Plaintiff to an award
26
of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3). The Ninth Circuit
27
affords trial courts broad discretion in determining the reasonableness of costs and fees.
28
Gates v. Deukmejian, 987 F.2d 1392, 1398 (9th Cir. 1992).
Generally, reasonable
1
attorney’s fees are based on the “lodestar” calculation set forth in Hensley v. Eckerhart,
2
461 U.S. 424, 433 (1983). See Fischer v. SJB-P.D., Inc., 214 F.3d 1115, 1119 (9th Cir.
3
2000). The Court must first determine a reasonable fee by multiplying “the number of
4
hours reasonably expended on the litigation” by “a reasonable hourly rate.” Hensley,
5
461 U.S. at 433. However, another “method is the ‘contingency’ method, in which the
6
court assumes that a contingency fee agreement is ‘presumptively reasonable,’ reducing
7
the amount called for in the agreement only when the court finds that the amount is
8
unreasonable.” Widrig v. Apfel, 140 F.3d 1207, 1209 n.4 (9th Cir. 1998).
9
Here, Plaintiff does not seek attorney’s fees based on an hourly rate. Rather,
10
Plaintiff requests reimbursement of attorney’s fees at $450, reflecting the 45%
11
contingency fee agreement between Plaintiff and his Counsel and the award of $1000 in
12
statutory fines. After reviewing Plaintiff’s attached exhibits, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s
13
calculation attorney labor is a reasonable amount of time spent on this litigation and the
14
attorney’s fees request is reasonable.
15
request of $415, for filing and service costs, to be reasonable. Therefore, the Court
16
orders attorney’s fees and costs in the requested amount of $865.
17
IV.
Furthermore, the Court finds Plaintiff’s cost
CONCLUSION
18
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and
19
Costs is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of
20
Plaintiff Todd Goldberg and against Defendant Central Credit Management, Inc. in the
21
amount of $865.00 for attorney’s fees and costs.
22
23
DATED THIS 27th day of February 2013.
24
25
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
26
27
28
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
