Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00233/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00233-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Job Discrimination (Race)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 07cv0233

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GAY L. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 07-0233-W(LSP)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

AND DENYING IN PART

DEFENDANT’S REQUEST 

FOR ATTORNEYS FEES

v.

LPL FINANCIAL SERVICES,

Defendant.

On July 25, 2007, the Court conducted a Settlement Conference

in this action, at which a settlement was achieved. As part of the

settlement, the parties consented to the jurisdiction of the

undersigned to decide, inter alia, all disputes regarding settlement

terms arising during the documentation thereof not resolved by the

parties themselves. The parties also agreed that any decision by

the undersigned with regard to the undersigned’s decision regarding

settlement terms, would be final, binding and non-appealable.

On August 31, 2007, Plaintiff’s counsel informed the Court by

letter that a dispute had arisen between the parties regarding the

proper issuance of IRS Form 1099s after payment of the agreed

settlement amount (hereafter “IRS dispute”).

Case 3:07-cv-00233-W-LSP Document 19 Filed 12/27/07 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

The Court notes that prior to August 31, 2007, Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s

counsel engaged in numerous discussions via e-mail regarding the IRS dispute.

Defendant’s counsel’s September 5, 2007 letter includes as exhibits numerous emails between counsel regarding the dispute.

- 2 - 07cv0233

On September 5, 2007, Defendant’s counsel responded via letter

to Plaintiff’s counsel’s August 31, 2007 letter.1 On October 4,

2007, Plaintiff’s counsel responded to Defendant’s counsel’s

September 5, 2007 letter.

On October 9, 2007, the Court ordered Plaintiff’s and

Defendant’s counsel to appear for a hearing regarding the IRS

dispute. In the October 9, 2007 Order, the Court stated:

To the extent a party has taken a clearly erroneous

position regarding the IRS issues raised in Plaintiff’s 

letter brief of August 31, 2007, Defendant’s letter

brief of September 5, 2007 and Plaintiff’s letter

brief of October 4, 2007, that party shall be ordered 

to pay the other party’s expenses in litigating the

issues discussed in those letter briefs.

On October 10, 2007, the hearing was held. Plaintiff’s and

Defendant’s counsel attended the hearing. At the hearing,

Plaintiff’s counsel recognized that the position he held, as stated

in his August 31 and October 4, 2007 letters, was erroneous.

At the October 10, 2007 hearing, Defendant’s counsel requested

that Plaintiff pay Defendant’s attorneys fees incurred in litigating

the IRS dispute. The Court ordered that Defendant file a

declaration stating the time and fees incurred in researching and

litigating the dispute.

On October 17, 2007, the Court issued a written Order Regarding

Form 1099 Issuing Requirements After Payment of Settlement. The

October 17, 2007 Order found Defendant’s position to be correct.

On October 16, 2007, Defendant’s counsel submitted the

declaration, as ordered. On October 31, 2007, Plaintiff’s counsel

Case 3:07-cv-00233-W-LSP Document 19 Filed 12/27/07 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 - 07cv0233

submitted a Reply to Defendant’s counsel’s declaration.

Thereafter, the Court requested that Defendant’s counsel submit

to it in camera, a supplemental declaration containing Defendant’s

counsel’s unredacted billing statements regarding the IRS dispute.

On November 26, 2007, Defendant’s counsel submitted to the Court in

camera, a Supplemental Declaration, attached to which were

unredacted billing statements regarding the IRS dispute.

Plaintiff’s counsel was served with a redacted copy of Defendant’s

counsel’s billing statements. On November 30, 2007, Plaintiff’s

counsel filed a Supplemental Reply to the Supplemental Declaration

of Defendant’s counsel.

The Court, having reviewed the letters, briefs, declarations of

counsel, and billing statements, and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, HEREBY

ORDERS:

It is clear to the Court that by late August 2007, or by early

September 2007, the parties could have resolved the IRS dispute. If

the parties had done so, it is unlikely that Defendant would have

sought its attorneys fees incurred in litigating the dispute.

Therefore, taking into account the events starting in early

September 2007, the approach each party utilized in resolving the

dispute and the expenses incurred by Defendant in establishing its

position with regard to the dispute, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiff

pay Defendant the sum of $8,610.00 (including costs), for attorneys

fees and costs incurred in litigating the IRS dispute.

\\

\\

\\

\\

Case 3:07-cv-00233-W-LSP Document 19 Filed 12/27/07 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 - 07cv0233

Payment of Defendant’s attorneys fees, as ordered herein, is

stayed until either the settlement agreed to by the parties is

confirmed, or a final judgment is entered.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: December 27, 2007

Hon. Leo S. Papas

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00233-W-LSP Document 19 Filed 12/27/07 Page 4 of 4