Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01463/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01463-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Petition to Quiet Title

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Thomas E. Russell, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

OneWest Bank, FSB, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-01463-PHX-FJM

ORDER

We have before us defendants' motion for attorneys' fees (doc. 40), memorandum of

points and authorities in support (doc. 46), plaintiff's opposition (doc. 57), and defendants'

reply (doc. 62). Defendants OneWest Bank, FSB ("OneWest"), Deutsche Bank National

Trust Company as Trustee for IndyMac INDX Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-AR31, and Merrill

Lynch Mortgage Lending, Inc. (collectively, the "OneWest defendants") request $18,380.00

in attorneys' fees based on 69.10 hours of work at rates between $190 and $425 per hour.

I

Plaintiff refinanced his Cave Creek home in 2006 by borrowing $1,000,000 from

Fairway Independent Mortgage Corp. The loan was secured by a deed of trust. The

beneficial interest in the note and deed of trust were later assigned to OneWest. Plaintiff

defaulted on his loan payments and a notice of trustee's sale was recorded.

Plaintiff's first amended complaint alleged quiet title against the OneWest defendants

and breach of good faith and fair dealing, violation of A.R.S. § 33-420, and negligent

Case 2:11-cv-01463-FJM Document 72 Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 2
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

- 2 -

performance of an undertaking against OneWest. (Doc. 13). We granted defendants' motion

to dismiss on October 20, 2011. (Doc. 30). We denied plaintiff's motion for reconsideration

on November 15, 2011. (Doc. 34).

II

Defendants contend they are entitled to fees under the deed of trust, which provides

that "Lender shall be entitled to collect all expenses incurred in pursuing the remedies

provided in this Section 22, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs

of title evidence." (Doc. 1, ex. A at 47). Plaintiff claims that none of the moving defendants

is listed as lender on his deed of trust and therefore this provision does not apply. But

plaintiff repeatedly claimed elsewhere that defendants were in privity with the original

lender. He alleged that the OneWest defendants asserted an ownership interest in the deed

of trust. And the lender assigned the deed of trust to OneWest. (Doc. 1, ex. A at 150).

Plaintiff also claims that the fees requested were not incurred "in pursuing the remedies

provided" by section 22 of the deed of trust. But the actions of defendants were necessary

to pursue their foreclosure remedy. They are entitled to fees under the deed of trust. In the

alternative, even if privity were not sufficient, defendants would be entitled to fees under

A.R.S. § 12-341.01(A). 

The deed of trust allows for recovery of "reasonable" fees. Defendants seek

$18,380.00 for a simple matter decided on a motion to dismiss. The hourly rate of $425 per

hour exceeds prevailing Phoenix rates for this kind of case and its reasonableness is not

supported by defendants' affidavit. We think 20 hours at $250.00 per hour would be

sufficient to get a non-meritorious complaint dismissed. 

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED GRANTING defendants' motion for an award of

attorneys' fees in the amount of $5,000.00. (Doc. 40).

DATED this 21st day of May, 2012.

Case 2:11-cv-01463-FJM Document 72 Filed 05/21/12 Page 2 of 2