Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08099/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08099-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case

---

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

Genesia Cook,

Petitioner,

vs.

Donald Richard Cook, 

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-07-8099-PCT-DGC

ORDER AND JUDGMENT

The Court ordered Respondent to return the parties’ child to Petitioner in accordance

with the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

(“Convention”), as implemented by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act

(“ICARA”), 42 U.S.C. § 11601 et seq. Dkt. #20. Petitioner has applied for attorneys’ fees

and costs totaling $27,288.03. Dkt. #18. This application is supported by exhibits describing

the expenses incurred by and on behalf of Petitioner related to the return of her child.

Dkt. ##18-2, 18-3. Respondent opposes the application. Dkt. #21.

ICARA requires any court ordering the return of a child under the Convention to order

the respondent to pay necessary expenses incurred by or on behalf of the petitioner “unless

the respondent establishes that such order would be clearly inappropriate.” 42 U.S.C.

§ 11607(b)(3). The purpose of this requirement is to restore the petitioner to the financial

position he or she would have been in had there been no removal and to deter such conduct

Case 3:07-cv-08099-DGC Document 22 Filed 10/23/07 Page 1 of 3
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 -

from happening in the first place. See Convention Text and Legal Analysis, 51 Fed. Reg.

10494, 10511 (Mar. 26, 1986); Flynn v. Borders, No. 5:06-323-JMH, 2007 WL 862548, *1

(E.D. Ky. Mar. 20, 2007).

Petitioner incurred $3,101.03 in expenses related to the return of her child, including

court costs and the cost of meals, lodging, and travel. Dkt. #18-2. The Court will award

Petitioner the full amount of her expenses because they were both necessary and reasonable.

42 U.S.C. § 11067(b)(3) (stating that covered expenses include “court costs, . . . foster home

or other care during the course of proceedings in the action, and transportation costs”); see

Rydder v. Rydder, 49 F.3d 369, 374 (8th Cir. 1995) (affirming award of more than $9,000

in expenses related to return of child); Grimer v. Grimer, Civ.A No. 93-4086-DES, 1993 WL

545261, at *2 (D. Kan. Dec. 8, 1993) (awarding costs of meals and travel totaling $1,752);

Freier v. Freier, 985 F. Supp. 710, 714 (E.D. Mich. 1997) (awarding $2,422 in travel costs);

Distler v. Distler, 26 F. Supp. 2d 723, 729 (D.N.J. 1998) ($1,823); In re Application of Hirts,

No. Civ.A.03-CV-03156, 2004 WL 1588227, at *1 n.1 (E.D. Pa. July 13, 2004) ($2,856).

Stephen Portell, an attorney with the law firm Quarles & Brady LLP, represented

Petitioner in this matter on a pro bono basis. Mr. Portell spent more than 80 hours on the

case. Dkt. #18-3. Mr. Portell requests a fee award totaling $24,187. Dkt. #18 at 2.

Respondent does not challenge this amount as unreasonable. Rather, he states that he is

unable to pay it because he has no job and very little money. Dkt. #21.

The Court has “discretion to reduce any potential award to allow for the financial

condition of the respondent.” Berendsen v. Nichols, 938 F. Supp. 737, 739 (D. Kan. 1996)

(citing Rydder, 49 F.3d at 373-74). In light of Respondent’s financial condition, and the fact

that Petitioner will awarded all of her expenses, the Court concludes that a fee award of

$24,187 would be “clearly inappropriate.” 42 U.S.C. § 11607(b)(3). The Court finds that

a fee award of $15,000, rather than $24,187, is more equitable. See Rydder, 49 F.3d at 374

(reducing award from $18,487 to $10,000 due to the respondent’s “straitened financial

circumstances”); In re Application of Hirts, 2004 WL 1588227 at *1 n.1 (reducing requested

award from $31,958 to $20,000); Berendsen, 938 F. Supp. at 739 (15% reduction); Whallon

Case 3:07-cv-08099-DGC Document 22 Filed 10/23/07 Page 2 of 3
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 -

v. Lynn, 356 F.3d 138, 139-41 (1st Cir. 2004) (affirming 25% reduction where the respondent

was unable to pay the requested award). The Court further finds that an award of $15,000

is sufficient to deter future violations of the Convention.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The verified application for attorneys’ fees and costs (Dkt. #18) is granted in

part and denied in part as set forth in this order.

2. Judgment for expenses and costs in the amount of $3,101.03 is granted in favor

of Petitioner Genesia Cook and against Respondent Donald Richard Cook. 

3. Judgment for attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $15,000.00 is granted

in favor of Petitioner’s attorneys, Stephen Portell and the law firm Quarles &

Brady LLP, and against Respondent Donald Richard Cook.

4. The judgments shall incur interest at the statutory rate of 4.14 percent per

annum, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

5. The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this order to Respondent at the

following address:

Donald Richard Cook

1548 North Garnet Drive

Prescott, AZ 86303

DATED this 22nd day of October, 2007.

Case 3:07-cv-08099-DGC Document 22 Filed 10/23/07 Page 3 of 3