United States District 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN C. ETTER, individually and on behalf

of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.,

Defendant. /

No. C 17-00184 WHA

ORDER RE ATTORNEY’S

FEES AND COSTS

Class counsel seek attorney’s fees in the amount of $1,959,975.00, as well as

reimbursement for litigation expenses in the amount of $144,498.00. The documentation

submitted with class counsel’s motion for attorney’s fees is inadequate because it does not

enable the Court to determine whether the request is reasonable. For example, the declarations

of Ryan M. Kelly and Willem F. Jonckheer list all individuals who billed time to this matter,

their rates, and their sum total of hours spent on each categorical task but provide no additional

information. Likewise, the declarations list expenses related to this litigation, for which class

counsel now seek reimbursement, in addition to attorney’s fees. Class counsel must provide an

itemized accounting for unreimbursed expenses listed as “Travel” and “Expert Witness Fees.” 

Travel must be broken down into at least the following categories: air transportation, ground

travel, meals, and lodging. Class counsel may include additional categories, if necessary. 

Within each category, each expense must be listed, including date, description, and cost. 

Professional fees may be broken down into separate categories if counsel deems appropriate. 

The date, description, and cost for each expense incurred, such as the fee paid to an expert to

produce an expert report on a specific issue, must be listed for all professional fees. A

declaration including this information must be filed by SEPTEMBER 10 AT NOON. 

Case 3:17-cv-00184-WHA Document 141 Filed 08/27/18 Page 1 of 3
United States District 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

2

Also by SEPTEMBER 10 AT NOON, class counsel must file and serve a detailed

declaration, organized by discrete projects, breaking down all attorney and paralegal time

sought to be recovered. For each project, there must be a detailed description of the work,

giving the date, hours expended, attorney name, and task for each work entry, in chronological

order. A “project” means a deposition, a motion, a witness interview, and so forth. It does not

mean generalized statements like “trial preparation” or “attended trial.” It includes discrete

items like “prepare supplemental trial brief on issue X.” The following is an example of time

collected by a project. 

PROJECT: ABC DEPOSITION (2 DAYS IN FRESNO)

Date TimekeeperDescription Hours x Rate = Fee

01-08-01 XYZ Assemble and photocopy exhibits for

use in deposition.

2.0 $100 $200

01-09-01 RST Review evidence and prepare to

examine ABC at deposition.

4.5 $200 $900

01-10-01 XYZ Research issue of work-product

privilege asserted by deponent.

1.5 $100 $150

01-11-01 RST Prepare for and take deposition. 8.5 $200 $1700

01-12-01 RST Prepare for and take deposition. 7.0 $200 $1400

Project Total: 23.5 $4350

All entries for a given project must be presented chronologically one after the other, i.e.,

uninterrupted by other projects, so that the timeline for each project can be readily grasped. 

Entries can be rounded to the nearest quarter-hour and should be net of write-down for

inefficiency or other cause. Please show the sub-totals for hours and fees per project, as in the

example above, and show grand totals for all projects combined at the end. Include only entries

for which compensation is sought, i.e., after application of “billing judgment.” For each

project, the declaration must further state, in percentage terms, the proportion of the project

directed at issues for which fees are awardable and must justify the percentage. This percentage

should then be applied against the project total to isolate the recoverable portion (a step not

shown in the example above). 

Case 3:17-cv-00184-WHA Document 141 Filed 08/27/18 Page 2 of 3
United States District 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

3

A separate summary chart of total time and fees sought per individual timekeeper (not

broken down by project) should also be shown at the end of the declaration. This

cross-tabulation will help illuminate all timekeepers’ respective workloads and roles in the

overall case. 

The declaration must also set forth (a) the qualifications, experience and role of each

attorney or paralegal for whom fees are sought; (b) the normal rate ordinarily charged for each

in the relevant time period; (c) how the rates were comparable to prevailing rates in the

community for like-skilled professionals; and (d) proof that “billing judgment” was exercised. 

On the latter point, as before, the declaration should describe adjustments made to eliminate

duplication, excess, associate-turnover expense, and so forth. These adjustments need not be

itemized but totals for the amount deleted per timekeeper should be stated. The declaration

must identify the records used to compile the entries and, specifically, state whether and the

extent to which the records were contemporaneous versus retroactively prepared. It must state

the extent to which any entries include estimates (and what any estimates were based on). 

Estimates and/or use of retroactively-made records may or may not be allowed, depending on

the facts and circumstances. 

Ordinarily, no more than one attorney and one paralegal need be present at a deposition;

more will normally be deemed excessive. Ordinarily, no more than one attorney need attend a

law-and-motion hearing; more will normally be deemed excessive. To allow for symmetry,

however, the award will take into account the staffing used by the opposing party. 

The Court needs this information to compute the proper lodestar even though counsel

are seeking a percentage of the class recovery. A special master may also be appointed to

determine the proper lodestar. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 27, 2018. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00184-WHA Document 141 Filed 08/27/18 Page 3 of 3