RODRIGUEZ
v.
CITY OF GULFPORT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court granted the defendant's motion for attorney's fees, awarding the requested amount based on the lodestar method.
The defendant moved to compel the plaintiff to respond to discovery requests, which the plaintiff failed to do. The court granted the motion to compel…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Burden Of Proof For Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant City of Gulfport (Gulfport) moves for a determination on the amount of the award of attorney’s fees against Defendant Raymond Rodriguez. (Doc. 50). Mr. Rodriguez did not respond and the time for doing so has expired. See Local Rule 3.01(c), M.D. Fla. (“If a party fails to timely respond, the motion is subject to treatment as unopposed.”).
I. BACKGROUND
Gulfport moved for an order compelling Mr. Rodriguez to respond to Gulfport’s Interrogatories and Requests for Production. (Doc. 46). Rodriguez did not respond to Gulfport’s motion within the fourteen days permitted by the Local Rules. See Local Rule 3.01(c), M.D. Fla. The court granted Gulfport’s motion and awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses incurred in bring its motion against Mr. Rodriguez. (Doc. 49); See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A) (“If the motion [to compel] is granted . . . the court must . . . require the party or deponent whose conduct necessitated the motion . . . to pay the movant’s reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including attorney’s fees.”). Gulfport now requests that the court award $2,272.00 in attorney’s fees incurred in connection with Gulfport’s motion to compel. (Doc. 50).
II. ANALYSIS
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A), the court has determined that an award of reasonable attorney’s fees is appropriate. As to amount, the Eleventh
Circuit applies the lodestar approach. “The starting point in fashioning an award of attorney's fees is to multiply the number of hours reasonably expended by a reasonable hourly rate.” Loranger v. Stierheim, 10 F. 3d 776, 781 (11th Cir. 1994). The moving party bears the burden of establishing the reasonableness of its hourly rate and the number of hours expended. Norman v. Hous. Auth. of the City Montgomery, 836 F. 2d 1292, 1303 (11th Cir. 1988). In making fee determinations, the court can rely on its own expertise as to the prevailing hourly rates in the marketplace and the number of hours expended.
Id. The court has reviewed the time records. (Doc. 50-1). The hourly rates requested and number of hours performed are reasonable. (See Doc. 50-1, Ex. A). Specifically, the reasonable attorney’s fees incurred relating to Gulfport’s motion to compel are $2,272.00, comprising 14.2 hours of work at the regular hourly rate charged by Gulfport for defense of governmental entities and their employees at $160.00.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is ORDERED: (1) Gulfport’s motion for attorney’s fees (Doc. 50) is GRANTED. The court orders fee shifting, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A), in the amount of $2,272.00 ($160.00 x 14.2) against Mr. Rodriguez. (2) The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send this order by mail to Mr. Rodriquez at 5322 26th Avenue South, Gulfport, Florida 33707, and by email to Mr. Rodriquez at [email protected]. ENTERED in Tampa, Florida on December 19, 2023. Aranda. Arne ih Sane.
AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE
United States Magistrate Judge
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Norman v. The Hous. Auth. OF the City OF Montgomery, 836 F.2d 1292 (11th Cir. 1988)
- Loranger v. Merrett Stierheim, 10 F.3d 776 (11th Cir. 1994)