Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-canb-5_14-ap-05073/USCOURTS-canb-5_14-ap-05073-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joseph Padgett
Plaintiff
Andrew Curtis Wright
Defendant

Document Text:

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

 For The Northern District Of California

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

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re ] Case No. 14-51560-ASW

]

ANDREW CURTIS WRIGHT, ] Chapter 7

]

Debtor. ]

]

]

JOSEPH PADGETT, ] Adv. Pro. No. 14-05073-ASW

]

Plaintiff, ] 

] 

v. ] 

]

ANDREW CURTIS WRIGHT, ]

]

Defendant. ]

___________________________________]

MEMORANDUM DECISION RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND

PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY’S FEES

On March 31, 2015, this Court issued a Tentative Decision

granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff is

represented by attorney Hugo Torbet, and Defendant is pro se.

A hearing was held on April 24, 2015, and the Court took the

matter under submission. The Court has carefully considered the

arguments of the parties, and makes the Tentative Decision final.

At the hearing, Mr. Wright argued that the District Court verdict

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed June 24, 2015

Arthur S. Weissbrodt

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

________________________________________

Entered on Docket 

June 24, 2015

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 14-05073 Doc# 24 Filed: 06/24/15 Entered: 06/24/15 16:24:27 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

 For The Northern District Of California

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

did not support a finding of willful and malicious conduct.

However, the Court finds that these arguments are addressed

sufficiently by the analysis at pages 6-9 of the Tentative

Decision.

In the Tentative Decision, the Court deferred ruling on Mr.

Torbet’s fees until final time records were provided. Mr. Torbet

has provided those records, which the Court has now reviewed.

As noted in the Tentative Decision, this Court may award fees

incurred in prosecuting a nondischargeability claim under

§ 523(a)(6) if Plaintiff could recover attorney’s fees in a nonbankruptcy court. In re Bertola, 317 B.R. 95, 99-100 (9th Cir. BAP

2004). Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b), the court may allow a prevailing

party in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action a reasonable attorney’s fee in

any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983, including fees incurred in certain post-judgment

proceedings, Stewart v. Gates, 987 F.2d 1450, 1452-53 (9th Cir.

1993), including enforcement activity. Balark v. Curtin, 655 F.2d

798, 803 (7th Cir. 1981).

Mr. Torbet’s declaration and billing statement indicates that

Mr. Torbet spent a total of 41 hours in both the main case and this

adversary proceeding at an hourly rate of $375, for a total of

$15,375.00. The Court finds that these fees are excessive.

The billing statement reflects that Mr. Torbet spent a total

of 17 hours ($6,375) on services related to the summary judgment

motion, not including time spent at the hearing. Mr. Torbet’s brief

in support of the summary judgment motion did not explicitly

analyze issue preclusion. Although the brief states that the jury

verdict establishes Mr. Wright’s liability, it does not set forth

Case: 14-05073 Doc# 24 Filed: 06/24/15 Entered: 06/24/15 16:24:27 Page 2 of 4 2
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

 For The Northern District Of California

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

the law regarding issue preclusion or analyze the individual prongs

of that doctrine, which are critical to an analysis of that issue. 

Additionally, the time entries for 7/20/14, and 8/6/14,

1/16/15, 3/6/15, and 3/31/15 (a total 12.5 hours) are clumped, so

that the Court cannot analyze how much time was spent on each

activity.

Most importantly, the principal amount at issue in this case

(other than attorney’s fees) is $10,001. Mr. Torbet’s fee request

is more than 150% of this amount, which is excessive by any

measure. 

For all of these reasons, the Court reduces the fees awarded

to Plaintiff’s counsel by 50%, for a total compensation of

$7,687.50.

Counsel for Plaintiff shall submit a proposed form of order

granting summary judgment and awarding fees in the amount of

$7,687.50, for the reasons stated in this Memorandum Decision and

in the Tentative Decision issued March 31, 2015. Once that order

has been entered by the Court, the Court will consider the proposed

judgment submitted by Plaintiff’s counsel on April 28, 2015.

*** END OF MEMORANDUM DECISION ***

Case: 14-05073 Doc# 24 Filed: 06/24/15 Entered: 06/24/15 16:24:27 Page 3 of 4 3
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

 For The Northern District Of California

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

Court Service List

Andrew Curtis Wright

P.O. Box 1651

Los Gatos, CA 95031

Case: 14-05073 Doc# 24 Filed: 06/24/15 Entered: 06/24/15 16:24:27 Page 4 of 4 4