Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-00563/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-00563-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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 previously granted Camelback Toyota’s separate request for attorney’s fees

incurred in relation to its motions to compel. (Dkt. 156, Order dated Feb. 13, 2008.)

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ernest B. Jackson,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ABC Nissan, Inc., et al.,

Defendants. _________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-03-563-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant CTVT Motors, Inc.’s (“Camelback Toyota”)

Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Dkt. 148) and supporting memorandum (Dkt. 155). As part of an

Order entered August 7, 2006, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of Camelback

Toyota on Plaintiff’s claims for alleged constructive discharge and hostile work environment.

 (Dkt. 104.) The Court also granted Camelback Toyota’s request for attorney’s fees incurred

in defending Plaintiff’s claims against it. (Id. at 27:10-28:7.) Following a stipulation of

dismissal with prejudice, Camelback Toyota filed the instant Motion for attorney’s fees incurred

in connection with defending against Plaintiff’s claims. (Dkt. 148.) The Court entered final

judgment by order dated December 10, 2007. (Dkt. 152.) Camelback Toyota then filed its

memorandum and exhibits supporting its request for attorney’s fees on February 8, 2008.1

 (Dkt.

155.) 

Case 2:03-cv-00563-SMM Document 157 Filed 03/04/08 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 -

Camelback Toyota seeks $59,961.50 in fees incurred in defending against Plaintiff’s

claims. Camelback Toyota’s counsel Stephanie K. Osteen billed 124.5 hours on this matter at

a rate of $275.00 per hour. Her co-counsel M. Brett Burns billed 65.5 hours at a rate of $250.00

per hour. Jennifer A. Reith (formerly Sweeney) and W. Richmond Malone, also attorneys at

the Akin Gump law firm, billed 10.8 and 6.4 hours, respectively, both at a rate of $175.00.

Paralegals Eileen M. Cummo and Mathew R. Peyton billed 8.1 and 4.5 hours, respectively, both

at a rate of $110.00. Camelback Toyota did not request an award of related expenses—such as

photocopying costs, conference calls, and mailing costs—and each attorney or paralegal worked

and billed more than the hours indicated.

Plaintiff did not respond to Camelback Toyota’s Memorandum for Attorney’s Fees

within the time allotted by the Federal and Local Rules of Civil Procedure. As Camelback

Toyota filed its Memorandum on February 8, 2008, Plaintiff’s responsive brief was due no later

than February 26, 2008. See LRCiv 54.2(b)(3). To date, Plaintiff has not filed any objection

to Camelback Toyota’s fee request. According to Camelback Toyota’s Statement of

Consultation, Ms. Osteen personally consulted in good faith with Plaintiff’s counsel Stephen

G. Montoya on February 1, 2008, but the parties were unable to resolve all disputed issues

relating to attorney’s fees. (Dkt. 155, Ex. 1.)

A prevailing defendant in a Title VII case may be awarded attorney’s fees if the court

finds the claim “was frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless, or that the plaintiff continued to

litigate after it clearly became so.” Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC, 434 U.S. 412, 422

(1978). The legal principles guiding a court in a Title VII dispute “apply with equal force” to

an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Manatt v. Bank of America, NA, 339 F.3d 792, 797

(9th Cir. 2003). Plaintiff’s claims against Camelback Toyota alleged violations of § 1981. The

Court found that diligent discovery and legal research would have made clear that Plaintiff

could not prevail on his claims against Camelback Toyota. (Dkt. 104, Order dated Aug. 7, 2007

at 27:18-28:7.) The Court now reaffirms its Order that attorney’s fees incurred in defending

against Plaintiff’s claims will be awarded.

Case 2:03-cv-00563-SMM Document 157 Filed 03/04/08 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 -

Furthermore, after reviewing the affidavit of Ms. Stephanie Osteen, the breakdown of

services rendered by counsel and paralegals, and considering Plaintiff’s lack of objection to the

fee award, the Court finds the request of $59,961.50 for attorney’s fees related to defending

Plaintiff’s claims to be reasonable. Consequently, Plaintiff will be ordered to pay this amount

to Camelback Toyota.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting Defendant CTVT Motors, Inc.’s Motion for

Attorney’s Fees Incurred in Connection with Defense of Claims (Dkt. 148). Defendant CTVT

Motors, Inc. d/b/a Camelback Toyota is awarded $59,961.50 in attorney’s fees incurred in

defending against Plaintiff’s claims, to be paid by Plaintiff Ernest B. Jackson and Attorney

Stephen G. Montoya, jointly and severally. 

DATED this 3rd day of March, 2008.

Case 2:03-cv-00563-SMM Document 157 Filed 03/04/08 Page 3 of 3