Schiff et al v. Exclusive Legal Marketing, Inc. et al, No. 2:2017cv00237 - Document 44 (S.D. Ohio 2018)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiffs are GRANTED $13,897.75 in attorney's fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 2/28/2018. (ew)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
Schiff et al v. Exclusive Legal Marketing, Inc. et al Doc. 44 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION SCOTT W. SCHIFF, et al., Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:17-CV-00237-MHW JUDGE MICHAEL H. WATSON Magistrate Judge Jolson v. EXCLUSIVE LEGAL MARKETING, INC., et. al. Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER In its February 20, 2018 Opinion and Order ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions (Doc. 33), the Court made the following findings: Defendants Exclusive Legal Marketing, Inc. (“ELM”) and Coety Bryant failed to obey this Court’s discovery orders for many months (Doc. 43 at 5); Plaintiffs suffered clear prejudice based on Defendants’ disobedience (id.); the attorney’s fees sought by Plaintiffs, which total $13,897.75, are not disproportionate to the value of this case (id. at 6); and Mr. Bryant’s representations related to his inability to pay were insufficient to support the conclusion that a sanction award would be unjust (id. at 6–7). Consequently, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions, but refrained from awarding costs and fees until Defendants had the opportunity to file any documentation demonstrating an inability to pay. (Doc. 43). The Court thus directed Mr. Bryant to file any such documentation within seven days and additionally directed the parties to meet and confer in an effort to resolve the issue. (Id. at 1). On February 22, 2018, the Court received a joint status report from the parties that stated Mr. Bryant alleged during the meet and confer that “he had no monetary assets and could not Dockets.Justia.com make any offer of monetary compensation, but that he would be providing this Court with information to demonstrate that he had no assets.” Mr. Bryant, however, filed no such documentation, and the time for doing so has passed. Upon review of Plaintiffs’ fee documentation (Doc. 33-1), the Court finds the requested fees of $13,897.75 to be reasonable. Moreover, even to the extent that paying the fees presents some hardship to Defendants, the Court finds that based upon all the facts and circumstances of this action, awarding Plaintiffs’ their expenses is not unjust. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are GRANTED $13,897.75 in attorney’s fees. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: February 28, 2018 /s/Kimberly A. Jolson KIMBERLY A. JOLSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.