Graaf v. Hull, Storey, Gibson Companies, L.L.C. (consent)
Court Docket Sheet

Middle District of Alabama

3:2014-cv-00282 (almd)

TEXT ORDER granting {{13}} Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Heather T. Rankie. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/8/2014.

Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 16 Filed 12/12/14 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION) MICHELLE GRAAF,) Plaintiff,)) CIVIL ACTION NO. v.) 3:14-CV-00282-SRW HULL, STOREY, & GIBSON) COMPANIES, LLC,) Defendant.))) F.R.C.P. RULE 68 OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE OF JUDGMENT COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Michelle Graaf, by and through her undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 68 (a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and hereby moves the Court and Clerk to enter judgment on Defendant’s Offer of Judgment and her acceptance of that offer. In support thereof, Ms. Graaf shows as follows: 1. Defendant Hull, Storey, & Gibson Companies, LLC, provided the Offer of Judgment attached as Exhibit "A" to Ms. Graaf on November 25, 2014. Rule 68 (a) Fed. R. Civ. P. 2. Ms. Graaf accepted the Offer of Judgment and served written notice accepting the offer both by certified mail and email on November 25, 2014. Exhibit "B" is the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment, provided both by certified mail and email. Rule 68 (a) Fed. R. Civ. P. Page 1 of 3 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 16 Filed 12/12/14 Page 2 of 3 3. As proof of service of the Offer of Judgment, Ms. Graaf has provided the Offer of Judgment as Exhibit "A" and affirmed in this pleading that she received it. As proof of service of the acceptance of the offer of judgment, Ms. Graaf attaches Exhibit "C", which contains Defendants attorneys’ confirmation of his receipt of Ms. Graaf’s acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. Rule 68 (a) Fed. R. Civ. P. Exhibit "D" from the United States Postal Service further shows delivery of the certified mail on December 11, 2014. 4. Given this proof, Rule 68 (a) mandates "the clerk must then enter judgment". WHEREFORE, premises considered, Ms. Graaf moves this Honorable Court and Clerk to enter judgment on Defendants’ Offer of Judgment attached as Exhibit "A". Respectfully Submitted, this the 12th Day of December, 2014. Landis Sexton/s/_______________________________ L. LANDIS SEXTON (SEX004) The ADA Group LLC 2047 Carter Hill Road Montgomery, Alabama 36106 334.819.4030 p 334.819.4032 f LLS@ADA-Firm.com Attorney for the Plaintiff Page 2 of 3 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 16 Filed 12/12/14 Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day I have filed with the Clerk of Court the aforementioned document for service of process by electronic mail or by placing same in the USPS mail addressed this 12th day of December, 2014, to the following: Heath F. Trousdale 119 S. Court Street Florence, Alabama 35630 hftrousdale@comcast.net Landis Sexton/s/_______________________________ OF COUNSEL Page 3 of 3

Exhibit A, Offer of Judgment

Case 3: 14-cv-00282-SRW Document 16-1 Filed 12/12/14 Page 12 EXHIBIT tabbies IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION MICHELLE GRAAF, Plainfiff, CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3: 14-CV-282 * * * * * * * * HULL, STOREY, GIBSON COMPANIES, L. L. C., Defendant. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * OFFER OF JUDGMENT Pursuant to the provision of Rule 68, Fed. R. Civ. P., the Defendant, HULL STOREY GIBSON COMPANIES, LLC, proposes the following settlement: Defendant HULL STOREY GIBSON COMPANIES, LLC, offers to allow a Final Judgment to be taken against it and in favor of the Plaintiff, MICHELLE GRAAF, for the following relief: 1. Injunctive relief requiring Defendant to alter the Village Mall to correct or modify those facilities and accommodations identified in Plaintiffs expert's report (Doc. 1) so that they will be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities to the extent required by the Americans with Disabilities Act and FAC. The corrections and modifications shall be completed no later than 36 months after the entry of Judgment. 2. An award for the costs for the filing of this action and for obtaining service of process. Case 3: 14-CV-00282-SRW Document 16-1 Filed 12/12/14 Page 2 of 2. 3. An award for reasonable attorney's fees incurred by Plaintiff through the date of service of this Offer in an amount to be agreed upon by the parties, or failing agreement, as determined by the Court. Defendant reserves the right to challenge the amount of attorney's fees as unreasonable given the circumstances of this case and to file such memoranda and evidence as may be appropriate to oppose the Plaintiffs fee claim. 4. This Offer is intended to resolve all claims raised or which could have been raised in this litigation, including attorney's fees and taxable costs. Dated this 25th day of November, 2014. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment was furnished to LANDIS SEXTON, The ADA Group, LLC, 2047 Carter Hill Road, Montgomery, Alabama, 36106 by U. S. Mail and email, this 25th day of November, 2014. KAAM, leaft F, Trousdale (TRO006) V Attorney for the Defendant 119 S. Court Street Florence, Alabama 35630 (256) 767-1058

Exhibit B, Rule 68 Notice of Acceptance

Case 3: 14-cv-00282-SRW Document 16-2. Filed 12/12/14 Page 12 EXHIBIT tabbies IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION MICHELLE GRAAF, Plaintiff, V. V vvvvvvvv CIVIL ACTION NO. 3: 14-CV-00282-SRW HULL, STOREY, & GIBSON COMPANIES, LLC, Defendant. RULE 68 NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE COMES NOw the Plaintiff, Michelle Graaf, by and through her undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 68 (a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and hereby notifies the Defendant, Hull, Storey, & Gibson Companies, LLC, of the acceptance of the offer of Judgment made November, 25, 2014, by Hull, Storey, & Gibson Companies, LLC, a copy of the offer is attached hereto. Respectfully Submitted, this the 25th Day of November, 2014./s/Mtuufu ALA L. LANDIS SEXTON (SEx004) The ADA Group LLC 2047 Carter Hill Road Montgomery, Alabama 36106 334. 819. 4030 p 334. 819. 4032 f LLS@ADA-Firm.com Attorney for the Plaintiff--Paivastumeetmiwitamin A. W. RUVAWWIWITAN TUACE ALIFATETANTOYHTIRFinieren muturretanwantara mostrannousuunnar AspiewPOATXurmat ster Page 1 of 2 Case 3: 14-cv-00282-SRW Document 16-2. Filed 12/12/14 Page 2 of 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this the 25th Day of November, 2014, this Notice of Acceptance was served upon Hull, Storey, & Gibson Companies, LLC, by USPS certified mail with an electronic copy of same to Heath F. Trousdale, Attorney for the Defendant, at the following address: Heath F. Trousdale 119S, Court Street Florence, Alabama 35630 hftrousdale@comcast.net MAGAzt/s/OF COUNSEL * TryTree TIHTI VIIMKIMI. KIMUTNJATwman' ordre natyrore WWIITTIYHANT' AWIYATIMAJdraladmirerrugMATHGammarem Hartmaac Grammessertedbottmiem N N

TEXT ORDER granting {{21}} Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Tara Amin. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/11/2014.

Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION) MICHELLE GRAAF,) Plaintiff,)) CIVIL ACTION NO. v.) 3:14-CV-00282-SRW HULL, STOREY, & GIBSON) COMPANIES, LLC,) Defendant.))) VERIFIED PETITION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Michelle Graaf, by and through her undersigned counsel and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205, moves the Court to award attorney fees, expenses and costs against Hull Storey & Gibson Companies LLC, in the amounts requested below: I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Ms. Graaf filed this Complaint under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. against Hull Storey & Gibson Companies LLC, alleging that dozens of architectural barriers denied her full and equal access to the goods and services at Defendants property in Lee County Alabama more commonly known as "Village Mall". The Parties conducted extensive document discovery and review, and Ms. Graaf’s expert provided an extremely detailed report on the architectural barriers Page 1 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 2 of 16 at Village Mall and provided readily achievable alternatives to remove the barriers to access. At the close of discovery, Hull Storey & Gibson Companies LLC, made an Offer of Judgment to fully remediate the barriers to access at Village Mall as recommended in Ms. Graaf’s expert report and further agreed that an award of attorney’s fees and expenses was appropriate, although the amount was undetermined. On January 13, 2015, the Court entered a final judgment "against the defendant and in favor of the plaintiff" and ordered remediation of each and every barrier requested by Ms. Graaf (Document 23). The Court further ordered "pursuant to the accepted offer of judgment, that Michelle Graaf is awarded: 1. Costs for filing of this action and for obtaining service of process, in an amount agreed upon by the parties, or to be determined by application of Ms. Graaf to the court within 15 days after the entry of this judgment and the Defendants response thereto, if no agreement is reached by the parties; 2. Reasonable attorney’s fees (including expenses) in amount agreed upon by the parties, or to be determined by the application of Ms. Graaf to the court within 15 days after entry of this judgment and Defendants response thereto, if no agreement is reached by the parties". II. SUMMARY OF REQUESTED FEES Ms. Graaf requests her attorneys, Landis Sexton and Tracy Birdsong, be compensated at a rate of $325.00 per hour and that Nathan Prokuski, paralegal, be compensated at the rate of $115.00 per hour. Ms. Graaf requests full Page 2 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 3 of 16 compensation for her experts’ costs in the amount of $7,533.74. Ms. Graaf requests payment of her other expenses for the case in the amount of $1,175.93. Ms. Graaf has expended considerable effort to eliminate redundant or excessive billing for attorneys and the paralegal. She requests compensation for the hours submitted at the requested rate stated above, for a base lodestar amount of $26,143.50. Nothing indicates that the lodestar amount should be adjusted downward, and Ms. Graaf does not request an upward adjustment. In total, Ms. Graaf requests the lodestar award plus payment for her costs and expenses described above for a total award of $34,853.17. III. RULE OF LAW The Americans with Disabilities Act, Title III, authorizes the payment of attorney’s fees to the "prevailing party" pursuant to 42 USC § 12205. The standards established in Christiansburg Garment Company v. EEOC 434 US 412 (1978), for determining when a Court should exercise its discretion to award of attorney’s fees to a prevailing party apply to cases brought under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Bruce v. City of Gainesville, 177 F. 3d 949, 951-52 (11th Cir. 1999). Under Christiansburg, a prevailing plaintiff "should ordinarily be awarded attorney’s fees in all but special circumstances." Id. at 951. The 11th Circuit has adopted the lodestar method for determining reasonable attorney’s fees. Norman v. Housing Authority of Montgomery, 836 F. 2d 1292, 1299 (11th Cir. 1988). The Court first must find the lodestar by Page 3 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 4 of 16 "multiply[ing] the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation by the customary fee charged in the community for similar legal services." Association of Disabled Americans v. Neptune designs Inc. 469 F.3d 1357, 1359(11th Cir. 2006). The Court may then adjust the lodestar to reach a more appropriate attorney’s fee, if necessary. Id. Ms. Graaf "bears the burden of establishing entitlement and documenting the appropriate hours and hourly rates," including setting out time expenditures "with sufficient particularity so that the District Court can assess the time claimed for each activity." Norman, supra, at 1303. "A reasonable hourly rate is the prevailing market rate in the relevant legal community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skills, experience, and reputation." Id. at 1299. In determining the reasonableness of the number of hours expended by counsel, the Court must exclude those hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary. Hensley v. Eckerhart 461 US 424, 434 (1983). "A lawyer may not be compensated … on activities for which he would not bill a client of means who was seriously intent on vindicating similar rights." Id. In making the above determinations, the Court is guided by the twelve (12) factors set out in Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, 480 8F.2d714, 717-19 (5th Cir. 1974); Dillard v. City of Elba, 863 F.2d 1550 (M.D. Ala. 1993). These factors are: (1) the time and labor required; (2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions; (3) the skill required to perform the legal services properly; (4) the preclusion of other employment by the attorney due to acceptance of the case; Page 4 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 5 of 16 (5) the customary fee in the community; (6) whether the fee is fixed or contingent; (7) time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; (8) the amount involved and the results obtained; (9) the experience, reputation, and ability of the attorney; (10) the undesirability of the case; (11) the nature and length of professional relationship with the client; (12) awards in similar cases. Johnson, supra; Dillard at 1552. The outcome of the lawsuit, the results obtained, is significant in the award of the fee. See, e.g. Hensley, 461 U.S. at 433-434. "If the result was excellent, then the court should compensate for all hours reasonably expended". Norman, 836 F. 2d 1292. IV. ANALYSIS 1. ENTITLEMENT TO AN AWARD FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS. Defendant does not dispute that Ms. Graaf is entitled to an attorney fee award. Indeed, in its Offer of Judgment Defendant agreed to an award for costs for filing of this action and for obtaining service of process and for reasonable attorney’s fees including expenses. The Court has entered its final judgment on the accepted offer of judgment made by Defendants. In the final judgment (Document 23), the Court (1) enters judgment "against defendant and in favor of plaintiff"; (2) awards Ms. Graaf costs for filing of this action and for obtaining service of process; and (3) awards Ms. Graaf reasonable attorney’s fees including expenses. Page 5 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 6 of 16 2. THE NUMBER OF HOURS REASONABLY EXPENDED. Exhibit "A" to this petition shows the number of hours expended by plaintiff’s counsel Sexton, Birdsong and paralegal Prokuski, in support of this case. In an effort to eliminate excessive, redundant, and unnecessary billing, Hensley, supra, Ms. Graaf has compiled a list of hours, Exhibit "B" that she has voluntarily eliminated from consideration under this petition, because she views these hours as either excessive, redundant, or unnecessary. Ms. Graaf has voluntarily eliminated 11 hours. Plaintiff’s counsel’s law firm focuses heavily on pre-suit resolution of Title III ADA barrier cases. Although pre-suit notice is not required and ADA litigation is acceptable, Plaintiff’s counsel has voluntarily chosen, so far, to focus most of their efforts on pre-suit resolution. Pre-suit resolution requires considerable research that is ultimately funneled into the Complaint and pursuit of the case if a case is not settled. For that reason, Plaintiff’s counsel expends time and resources prior to the filing of the case, as Exhibit "A" reflects. Defendants have conducted this litigation in a straightforward manner. In the Report of the Parties Planning Meeting, Defendants acknowledged that settlement might be appropriate after discovery. Defendants did indeed settle the case after discovery and accepted 100% responsibility for the necessary remediations. For these things, Defendants are to be commended. Nevertheless, Defendants have made decisions that have increased the cost of this litigation. Defendant essentially sought delay as long as reasonably Page 6 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 7 of 16 possible (until after the initial discovery cutoff) before making the offer of judgment. Defendant’s choice to seek this delay has directly resulted in the discovery costs reflected in Plaintiffs’ attorneys hours. Defendant could just as well have chosen to agree to do 100% of the remediations determined by the Plaintiffs expert at almost any time in the litigation and thereby eliminated their exposure to fees and expenses for the continuing work by Plaintiffs’ counsel. Plaintiff’s counsel routinely settles cases with an agreement to make the remediations suggested by its expert, so Defendant could have chosen that route and ended the case shortly after it was filed, without even a responsive pleading. Defendant’s choice to litigate a case when it could have been settled much earlier is a factor the Court may properly take into account in assessing the reasonableness of the hours expended by Plaintiffs’ counsel. See, E. G. City of Riverside v. Rivera 477 US 561, 580 in. 11(1986) (plurality opinion); Gaylor v. Greenbrier of Dahlonega Shopping Center Inc. United States District Court, Gainesville Division 2:12-CV-00082 (2014). In a further effort to minimize costs, Plaintiffs’ counsel chose to utilize their paralegal, Prokuski, for many hours that an attorney typically would bill for. This cannot be overstated, because if Plaintiffs’ counsel truly sought to maximize fees, the distribution of work would have been dramatically different. Sexton’s hours total 48.9. Birdsong’s hours total 15.3. Prokuski’s hours are 45.9. Page 7 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 8 of 16 A careful review of these hours expended by the Court will reveal that Ms. Graaf’s attorneys sought to minimize hours throughout the litigation and that the litigation could have been resolved much quicker, had Defendants not preferred to delay the commitment to settle until as late in the litigation as reasonably possible. Ms. Graaf’s attorneys have voluntarily excluded hours they thought inappropriate and provided the list of those hours. Ms. Graaf’s attorneys have chosen to use paralegal services instead of bill for work themselves at every available opportunity. Ms. Graaf’s attorneys were extremely responsible in cost minimization in all aspects of this case. Finally and significantly, Plaintiff and counsel obtained 100% of the relief sought. "If that result is excellent, the Court should compensate for all hours reasonably expended". Norman, supra. 3. REASONABLE HOURLY RATE "A reasonable hourly rate is the prevailing market rate in the relevant legal community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skills, experience, and reputation" Norman, at 1299. None of the Plaintiffs representatives have a prior attorney fee award for an ADA title III barrier case. Plaintiffs’ counsel, unlike other law firms who represent clients in ADA Title III cases, settle most cases prior to litigation. Plaintiff’s attorneys have settled 237 Title III ADA barrier cases, but only litigated 14 title III ADA barrier cases, so that they have a large history of ADA Title III barrier cases resolved by settlement prior to litigation rather than by litigation. Plaintiff’s counsel should certainly not have a reduced attorney fee hourly rate Page 8 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 9 of 16 for choosing to try to resolve cases prior to litigation rather than by constantly litigating those same cases that could have been resolved without it. Plaintiff’s counsel, Landis Sexton, has practiced complex litigation for most of his 26 years of practice (See, Exhibit "C"). The bulk of his practice has focused on vehicular products liability litigation, business tort litigation, pharmaceutical litigation, and massive toxic tort litigation. That practice more than qualifies him to litigate the ADA Title III barrier cases that he now pursues. Mr. Sexton began his ADA practice in 2012. Mr. Sexton has settled 85 ADA Title III barrier cases and litigated 14 such cases. Plaintiff’s counsel, Tracy Birdsong, has practiced sophisticated litigation for 18 years (See, Exhibit "D"). She specialized in criminal defense, particularly sex offenses, murder, and capital murder. Ms. Birdsong began her ADA practice in 2012. Sexton and Birdsong combined to form the Attorneys for Disabled Americans Group LLC, (The ADA Group LLC) in 2013, and dedicate 99% of their practice to ADA Title III barrier cases. Ms. Birdsong has settled 107 ADA Title III barrier cases and also litigated the same 14 cases as Sexton. Ms. Graaf’s attorneys have been unable to locate a Title III ADA barrier case with an award of attorney’s fees in either the Middle, Northern, or Southern District of Alabama. Perhaps there is one, but they have not found it. Although the Court is effectively deemed by law, to be an expert on the subject of the reasonable hourly rate for ADA Title III barrier cases in the Middle Page 9 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 10 of 16 District, Ms. Graaf believes a review of attorney fee rates in nearby jurisdictions within the 11th Circuit might be instructive to the Court: Disabled Patriots of Am., Inc. v. Regency Centers, L.P., No. 1:04-CV-0419 RWS, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44851 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 3, 2005) (in Title III ADA case in 2005, awarding $300/hour for attorneys with 26 and 30 years' experience and $250/hour for attorney with 12 years' experience); Disabled Patriots of Am., Inc. v. HT West End, LLC, No. 1:04-CV-3216-JEC, 2007 WL 789014, at *2-*3 (N.D.Ga. Mar. 14, 2007) (in Title III ADA case in 2007, awarding $250/hour to attorneys with 25 years' experience and $200/hour to attorney with 15 years' experience where "attorneys" work... was limited to drafting a complaint, preparing routine discovery requests, and drafting a settlement agreement"); Stewart v. Regent Asset Mgmt. Solutions, Inc., No. 1:10-CV-2552-CC-JFK, 2011 WL 1766018, at *9 (N.D. Ga. May 4, 2011) (Report and Recommendation) (approving $325/hour for attorney with 19 years' experience and $205/hour for attorney with only two years' experience); Moore ex rel. Moore v. Cook, No. 1:07-CV-631-TWT, 2012 WL 5362892, at *4 (N.D.Ga. Oct. 31, 2012) (awarding $475/hour for attorney with 23 years' experience, $400/hour for attorney with 26 years' experience, and $330/hour for attorney with 10 years' experience). Plaintiff also cites cases from other jurisdictions granting fee requests by Plaintiff's counsel based on rates comparable to or higher than the rates they are requesting in this case. See, Smith v. Intuit, No. 5:12-cv-00222-EJD, slip op. at 2 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 2013) (unpublished) (approving fee request calculated using 2013 hourly rate of $500 for Mr. Ku and $400 for Mr. Casey);[9] Martinez v. Public Page 10 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 11 of 16 Storage, No. 09-21488-CIV, 2010 WL 2219712, at *5 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2010) (Report and Recommendation) (approving hourly rate of $300 for Mr. Ku and Mr. Mussman and $250 for Mr. Casey). Given Mr. Sexton and Ms. Birdsong’s extensive background in complex litigation, their focus on ADA Title III barrier cases from 2012 forward, their recent creation of the firm dedicated 99% to Title III ADA barrier cases; their settlement of 237 ADA Title III barrier cases, their litigation of 14 ADA Title III barrier cases, and the prevailing market rate for similar services, Mr. Sexton and Ms. Birdsong’s request for an hourly rate of $325 is reasonable. Consideration of the following Johnson, supra, factors supports the conclusion that an hourly rate of $325 for both Mr. Sexton and Ms. Birdsong is appropriate. A factor under Johnson is the "novelty and difficulty of the litigation". Ms. Graaf’s attorneys are only aware of five lawyers in the state of Alabama who consistently practice ADA Title III barrier cases. Three of those lawyers are Sexton, Birdsong, and their associate Alan Polson. Ms. Graaf knows that there is another attorney in Birmingham, Ed Zwilling, and another attorney, Jon Folmar, who consistently practice Title III ADA barrier litigation in Alabama. ADA regulations require careful study and daily practice to master their full application to all the terrain and layout of architectural structures with the fairly voluminous regulations, advisories, technical updates, and nonbinding Justice Department publications. ADA Title III barrier case law is actually quite Page 11 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 12 of 16 straightforward, though nevertheless tedious, and sometimes technical. The sophisticated pursuit of Title III ADA barrier cases at the level brought by Sexton and Birdsong is very rare. Another factor under Johnson, is the "results obtained." The results obtained could not be better. Defendant literally agreed to make every single solitary remediation called for in Plaintiff’s expert report. That is an excellent result, to say the least; in fact it is the best result that could possibly have been obtained. These factors, and in particular the level of success obtained, strongly support the requested hourly rate. The requested hourly rate for the paralegal Mr. Prokuski is reasonable. Attached as Exhibit "E" is the 2015 National Utilization and Compensation Survey Report by the National Association of Legal Assistance and Paralegals. This report shows that Mr. Prokuski’s rate could be $128.00 an hour according to the geographical region in which he is employed; or, alternatively in a firm Mr. Prokuski’s size, a billing rate would average in 2014 to be $116.00 per hour; or alternatively given Mr. Prokuski’s completed Bachelor’s Degree in Legal Studies plus his ABA approved undergraduate certificate in Paralegal Studies would result in an hourly rate of $134.00 per hour. Plaintiff is seeking compensation at the lowest of these rates, the rate at which paralegals in similar sized firms are billed, $115.00 hourly. Page 12 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 13 of 16 Ms. Graaf does not request an upward deviation from the lodestar, nor does there appear to be any reason for a downward deviation. In summary, Mr. Sexton has a total of 48.9 hours, to be billed at $325 an hour, for a total fee of $15,892.50. Ms. Birdsong has a total of 15.3 hours, to be billed at $325 an hour, for a total fee of $4,972.50 Mr. Prokuski has total of 45.9 hours, to be billed at $115 an hour, for a total fee of 5,278.50. The total of these awards is $26,143.50. 4. AWARD FOR EXPENSES. Expert Kirk Tcherneshoff’s bill and contract are attached as Exhibit "F"; his curriculum vitae is Exhibit "G". Although there is no record of consideration of Mr. Tcherneshoff’s reports in the Middle District of Alabama, the cost of Mr. Tcherneshoff’s report was fully compensated in the case Rieves v. Steer Mill Inc., Middle District of Florida Fort Myers Division 2:04-cv-00037, which is attached as "Exhibit H". In that case Mr. Tcherneshoff was compensated at the rate of $200.00 per hour and his travel time to the Middle District of Florida was fully compensated. In this case, Mr. Tcheneshoff only charged $150.00 per hour and his travel was only to Auburn/Opelika, Alabama, much shorter than the travel for which he was fully compensated in the Rieves, litigation. Mr. Tcherneshoff testimony was essential not only to identify the violations but to establish that the remediation was readily achievable. To show that, he had to show the barriers to be removed, a specific plan for removal, and the cost. Ms. Graaf literally could not have prevailed without his testimony. Page 13 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 14 of 16 Ms. Graaf’s attorneys have compensated Mr. Tcherneshoff fully already. Accordingly, Ms. Graaf requests $7,533.74 in reimbursement for the fees paid Mr. Tcherneshoff previously. There are $1,175.93 in expenses for filing fees, travel to Auburn, postage, necessary copies, and construction reports. Ms. Graaf further requests that these expenses be awarded. The total of Mr. Tcherneshoff’s bill plus other expenses is $8,709.67 which Ms. Graaf requests to be awarded fully. V. CONCLUSION For all the above, Ms. Graaf seeks an award in fees and expenses, in a total amount of $34,853.17. WHEREFORE, premises considered, Ms. Graaf respectfully moves the Court to enter an order awarding her and her counsel reasonable fees and expenses totaling $34,853.17. Respectfully Submitted, this the 28th Day of January, 2015. Landis Sexton/s/_______________________________ L. LANDIS SEXTON (SEX004) The ADA Group LLC 2047 Carter Hill Road Montgomery, Alabama 36106 334.819.4030 p 334.819.4032 f LLS@ADA-Firm.com Attorney for the Plaintiff Page 14 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 15 of 16 VI. VERIFICATION I, Landis Sexton, pursuant to 28 US Code § 1746 hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that this declaration was executed in Montgomery County Alabama on January 28, 2015. Landis Sexton/s/_______________________________ L. LANDIS SEXTON (SEX004) The ADA Group LLC 2047 Carter Hill Road Montgomery, Alabama 36106 334.819.4030 p 334.819.4032 f LLS@ADA-Firm.com Attorney for the Plaintiff Page 15 of 16 Case 3:14-cv-00282-SRW Document 24 Filed 01/28/15 Page 16 of 16 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day I have filed with the Clerk of Court the aforementioned document for service of process by electronic mail or by placing same in the USPS mail addressed this 28th day of January, 2015, to the following: Heath F. Trousdale 119 S. Court Street Florence, Alabama 35630 hftrousdale@comcast.net Landis Sexton/s/_______________________________ OF COUNSEL Page 16 of 16

Interested in this case?

Sign up to receive real-time updates
Last full docket sheet refresh: 622 days ago. Refresh now
#
Datesort arrow up
Description
11/12/2014
Judge John A. Jarvey and Magistrate Judge Ross A. Walters added. (Text entry; no document attached.)
1
04/15/2014
COMPLAINT Class Action against All Defendants Filing fee paid in the amount of $ 400, receipt number 0863-2460410., filed by Frederick Rozo. Notice of Dismissal for lack of Service deadline set for 3/16/2015. Rule 16 Notice of Dismissal set for 3/16/2015.
1
fee receipt
1 Attachment
2
04/15/2014
Errata re 1 Complaint, filed by Frederick Rozo.
3
04/17/2014
Errata re 1 Complaint, filed by Frederick Rozo.
04/17/2014
NOTICE of Assignment to Magistrate Judge mailed to counsel for Michelle Graaf (NO PDF Document attached to this notice). (Text entry; no document attached.)
4
04/24/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2466843 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Ross A. Walters.
04/24/2014
***Attorney Tracy Gwyn Birdsong for Michelle Graaf added pursuant to 4 signed notice of appearance. (NO PDF Document attached to this notice). (Text entry; no document attached.)
5
05/02/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2466877 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Ross A. Walters.
6
05/21/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2466923 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Ross A. Walters.
7
06/05/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2466935 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Ross A. Walters.
11/24/2014
Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer added. Magistrate Judge Ross A. Walters no longer assigned to case. (Text entry; no document attached.)
8
06/19/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 4 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Jason H. Kim. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 11/26/2014.
9
06/30/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 5 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Todd M. Schneider. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 11/26/2014.
10
06/30/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 6 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Michael C. McKay. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 11/26/2014.
11
07/03/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 7 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Garrett W. Wotkyns. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 11/26/2014.
12
07/03/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2473261 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
13
11/12/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2474562 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
14
11/13/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2474570 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
1
standing order & format
1 Attachment
15
11/13/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 12 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Mark T. Johnson. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/4/2014.
16
12/12/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 13 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Heather T. Rankie. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/8/2014.
1
Exhibit A, Offer of Judgment
2
Exhibit B, Rule 68 Notice of Acceptance
3
Exhibit C
4
Exhibit D
4 Attachments
12/12/2014
MOTION seeking entry of judgment by Michelle Graaf (NO PDF dcoument attached to this notice-See Docket Entry 16). (Text entry; no document attached.)
17
12/15/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 14 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Christopher T. Micheletti. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/8/2014.
18
01/08/2015
NOTICE of Appearance by Angel Anna West on behalf of Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company
19
01/08/2015
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2480902 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
20
01/09/2015
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2480905 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
21
01/09/2015
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2480906 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
1
https://ecf.almd.uscourts.gov/doc1/01712420026" onClick="goDLS{{'/doc1/01712420026','53413','58','','2','1','',''}};">1</a> Text of Proposed Order Exhibit A) Modified on 1/12/2015 to reflect as also filed on behalf of Hull, Storey, Gibson Companies, LLC (qc/djy,)
1 Attachment
22
01/13/2015
TEXT ORDER granting 19 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Joel S. Feldman. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/11/2014.
23
01/13/2015
TEXT ORDER granting 20 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Mark B. Blocker. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/11/2014.
1
civil appeals checklist). Furnished to calendar group & JT (terminates Final Pretrial Conference 04/02/2015; Non-Jury Trial 05/06/2015
1 Attachment
24
01/28/2015
TEXT ORDER granting 21 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Tara Amin. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/11/2014.
1
Exhibit A
2
Exhibit B
3
Exhibit C
4
Exhibit D
5
Exhibit E
6
Exhibit F
7
Exhibit G
8
Exhibit H
8 Attachments
25
02/06/2015
Corporate Disclosure/Statement of Interest by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.
02/11/2015
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Honorable Judge Wallace Capel, Jr: Mediation Conference held on 2/11/2015 (No PDF attached). (Recording Time 12:37 - 12:40.) (Text entry; no document attached.)
26
02/19/2015
Unresisted MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint, or otherwise plead in response by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
27
02/20/2015
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 26 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Principal Financial Group, Inc. answer due 1/23/2015; Principal Life Insurance Company answer due 1/23/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 12/16/2014.
28
12/17/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2486210 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
29
12/17/2014
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2486218 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer.
30
12/18/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 28 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Nina Wasow. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/17/2014.
31
12/18/2014
TEXT ORDER granting 29 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Todd Jackson. Signed by Clerk, Marge Krahn on 12/18/2014.
32
01/23/2015
MOTION to Dismiss Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company. Responses due by 2/9/2015
1
Memorandum in Support
2
Declaration Of Tara Amin In Support Of Motion To Dismiss
3
Exhibit 1 to the Declaration Of Tara Amin
4
Exhibit 2 to the Declaration Of Tara Amin
4 Attachments
33
01/29/2015
MOTION for Extension of Time to File Plaintiff's Unresisted Motion to Extend Time to Resist Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Expedited Relief Requested by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 2/17/2015
34
01/29/2015
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 33 Motion for Extension of Time to File. Plaintiff shall respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss by 2/23/15. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 1/29/2015.
01/29/2015
Set/Reset Deadlines as to 32 Motion to Dismiss Responses due by 2/23/2015 (Text entry; no document attached.)
35
02/23/2015
MOTION to file overlength brief by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 3/12/2015
1
Exhibit 1
1 Attachment
36
02/23/2015
DECLARATION of Nina Wasow re 35 MOTION to file overlength brief by Frederick Rozo.
1
Exhibit 1
2
Exhibit 2
3
Exhibit 3
4
Exhibit 4
4 Attachments
37
02/24/2015
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 35 Motion to file overlength brief. Plaintiff is granted permission to file 26-page brief in opposition; Defendants are granted permission to file a 10-page reply brief. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 2/24/2015.
38
02/25/2015
Unresisted MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply In Support Of Its Motion To Dismiss by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 3/16/2015
39
02/26/2015
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 38 Defendants' unresisted Motion for Extension of Time to March 9, 2015 to File reply in support of motion to dismiss. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 2/26/2015.
40
03/03/2015
RESPONSE to Motion re 32 MOTION to Dismiss Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) filed by Frederick Rozo. Replies due by 3/13/2015.
1
Exhibit 1
2
Exhibit 2
3
Exhibit 3
4
https://ecf.iasd.uscourts.gov/doc1/07712078349" onClick="goDLS{{'/doc1/07712078349','53413','117','','2','1','',''}};">4</a> Exhibit 4)
4 Attachments
41
03/09/2015
REPLY Memorandum in Support of re 32 MOTION to Dismiss Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) filed by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.
42
03/09/2015
DECLARATION of Mark Blocker re 41 Reply to Response to Motion to Dismiss Under FRCP 12(b)(6) by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company.
1
Exhibit Interest Calculation
1 Attachment
43
03/24/2015
NOTICE by Frederick Rozo of Firm Name Change
44
05/12/2015
TEXT ORDER: At the request of counsel, a Status Conference is set for 5/15/2015 10:00 AM in Phone Hearing before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. Counsel for Plaintiff shall make arrangements for the conference call. The Court may be reached at 515-284-6200. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 5/12/2015.
45
05/15/2015
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Status Conference held on 5/15/2015.
46
05/15/2015
ORDER Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 5/15/2015.
05/15/2015
Set/Reset Deadlines: Status Report due by 7/15/2015. (Text entry; no document attached.)
47
05/20/2015
NOTICE by Frederick Rozo re 40 Response to Motion
48
05/22/2015
NOTICE by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company re 32 MOTION to Dismiss Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Notice Of Withdrawal Of Statute Of Limitations Argument)
49
05/29/2015
NOTICE by Frederick Rozo re 32 MOTION to Dismiss Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) re NOTICE OF NEW AUTHORITY
1
Exhibit Ex A - Teet MTD Order
1 Attachment
50
06/04/2015
BRIEF Response To Plaintiffs Notice Of New Authority (DKT. 49) by Principal Financial Group, Inc., Principal Life Insurance Company. Modified on 6/8/2015 created link.
51
07/15/2015
STATUS REPORT by Frederick Rozo.
52
07/15/2015
PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN BY PLAINTIFF.
53
07/16/2015
TEXT ORDER re 52 PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN BY PLAINTIFF, 51 Status Report filed by Frederick Rozo. A hearing on these Motions is set for 8/4/2015 at 10:00 AM in Phone Hearing before Chief Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. Counsel for Defendant shall make the arrangements for the phone call. The Court may be reached at 515-284-6200. The Court will discuss the status report 51, the request to continue stay of discovery or phasing of discovery, and any proposed scheduling orders the parties are discussing. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 7/16/2015.
54
07/17/2015
NOTICE of Change of Address by Mark T. Johnson
55
07/29/2015
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2684030 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.
56
07/30/2015
TEXT ORDER granting 55 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for attorney, Jacob Richards. Signed by Clerk Marjorie E. Krahn on 07/30/15. (bp)
57
08/04/2015
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Motion Hearing held on 8/4/2015 re 52 PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN BY PLAINTIFF. (Court Reporter SueAnn Jones.)
58
08/04/2015
ORDER setting status conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 8/4/2015.
08/04/2015
Set Hearing: Status Conference set for 9/15/2015 11:00 AM in Phone Hearing before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. (Text entry; no document attached.)
59
09/15/2015
TEXT ONLY ORDER: Hearing was held in this matter on September 15, 2015, regarding scheduling. By September 25, 2015, the parties shall submit a Proposed Scheduling Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 9/15/2015.
60
09/15/2015
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Status Conference held on 9/15/2015.
09/16/2015
Set Deadline: Proposed Scheduling Order due 9/25/2015. (Text entry; no document attached.)
61
09/21/2015
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 32 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Chief Judge John A. Jarvey on 9/21/2015.
62
09/25/2015
Proposed Pretrial Order and Proposed Schedule by Frederick Rozo.
09/28/2015
Set/Reset Deadlines: Motions to Amend Pleadings due by 10/21/2015. Per order 61 (Text entry; no document attached.)
63
09/30/2015
PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN.
64
09/30/2015
ORDER finding as moot 52 PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN; adopting 63 PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN: Motions to Add Parties due by 7/15/2016. Plaintiffs Expert Witness Disclosures due by 8/15/2016. Defendants Expert Witness Disclosures due by 9/12/2016. Plaintiffs Rebuttal Witness Disclosures due by 10/10/2016. Motions to Amend Pleadings due by 10/21/2016. Deadline for completion of class certification expert discovery 10/31/2016. Deadline to file Motion for Class Certification November 21, 2016. See order for further details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 9/30/2015.
65
10/26/2015
Unresisted MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 11/12/2015
1
Exhibit A
1 Attachment
66
10/27/2015
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 65 unresisted Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 10/27/15.
67
10/30/2015
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Principal Financial Group, Inc. and Principal Life Insurance Company filed by Frederick Rozo.
68
11/05/2015
NOTICE of Change of Address by Nina R. Wasow
69
11/16/2015
ANSWER to 67 Amended Complaint by Principal Life Insurance Company.
70
11/18/2015
NOTICE by Frederick Rozo --Notice of Withdrawal of Jacob Richards as Counsel of Record for Plaintiff--
71
02/10/2016
MOTION for Protective Order by Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 2/29/2016
1
Exhibit A
1 Attachment
72
02/23/2016
RESPONSE to Motion re 71 MOTION for Protective Order - Request for Status Conference filed by Frederick Rozo. Replies due by 3/4/2016.
73
02/23/2016
TEXT ORDER re 71 MOTION for Protective Order filed by Principal Life Insurance Company. Hearing on this Motion is set for 2/29/2016 at 11:00 AM (Central Time) in Phone Hearing before Chief Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. Counsel shall call the Court's AT&T Conference line at 1-866-590-5055 and enter access code 7013731 at the prompt. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 2/23/2016.
74
02/24/2016
NOTICE by Frederick Rozo of Firm Name Change
75
02/29/2016
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Motion Hearing held on 2/29/2016 re 71 MOTION for Protective Order filed by Principal Life Insurance Company. (Court Reporter Kelli Mulcahy.)
76
02/29/2016
PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 2/29/2016.
77
05/27/2016
STATUS REPORT Requesting Status Conference with Magistrate Judge by Frederick Rozo.
78
06/01/2016
TEXT ORDER re 77 Status Report filed by Frederick Rozo. A Status Conference is set for 6/27/2016 10:30 AM in Phone Hearing before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. Counsel shall call the Court's AT&T conference line at 1-866-590-5055 and enter code 7013731 at the prompt. By June 23, 2016, counsel shall provide the Court with a Joint Agenda. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 6/1/2016.
79
06/02/2016
TEXT ORDER re 77 Status Report filed by Frederick Rozo. The status conference set for June 27, 2016, is rescheduled. Status Conference now set for June 8, 2016 at 11:00 AM by telephone conference call. Counsel shall call the Court's AT&T conference line at 1-866-590-5055 and enter code 7013731 at the prompt. By June 6, 2016, counsel shall provide the Court with a Joint Agenda. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 6/2/2016.
06/02/2016
Set/Reset Hearings: Status Conference set for 6/8/2016 11:00 AM in Phone Hearing using the AT&T conference line before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. (Text entry; no document attached.)
80
06/08/2016
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Status Conference held on 6/8/2016. (Court Reporter Ann Moyna.)
81
06/08/2016
ORDER Defendants Expert Witness Disclosures due by 10/11/2016. Plaintiffs Expert Witness Disclosures due by 9/15/2016. Plaintiffs Rebuttal Witness Disclosures due by 10/31/2016. Status Conference set for 7/8/2016 11:00 AM in Phone Hearing before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. Discovery Deadline 11/4/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 6/8/2016. See Order for specifics.
82
06/17/2016
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Receipt Number: 0863-2948638 Fee paid in the amount of $75. by Frederick Rozo.
83
06/17/2016
TEXT ORDER granting 82 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Rory Zamansky. Signed by Clerk of Court Marjorie Krahn on 6/17/2016.
84
07/08/2016
NOTICE Joint Agenda by Principal Life Insurance Company, Frederick Rozo
85
07/08/2016
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Status Conference held on 7/8/2016. Status Conference set for 8/3/2016 11:30 AM by Phone Hearing via the Courts AT&T conference line. Counsel shall call 1-866-590-5055 and enter code 7013731 at the prompt before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer.
86
07/08/2016
ORDER regarding items discussed at the status conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 7/8/2016. Modified on 7/8/2016 (rmj). (Main Document 86 replaced on 7/11/2016).
87
08/03/2016
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Status Conference held on 8/3/2016.
88
08/03/2016
ORDER Status Conference set for 9/8/2016 02:30 PM in Phone Hearing before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 8/3/2016.
89
08/19/2016
MOTION to Compel by Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 9/6/2016
1
Exhibit A
2
Exhibit B
3
Exhibit C
3 Attachments
90
08/19/2016
DECLARATION of Tara A. Amin re 89 MOTION to Compel by Principal Life Insurance Company.
91
08/29/2016
RESPONSE to Motion re 89 MOTION to Compel filed by Frederick Rozo. Replies due by 9/9/2016.
1
Exhibit A
2
Exhibit B
3
Exhibit C
4
Exhibit D
4 Attachments
92
08/30/2016
TEXT ORDER re 89 MOTION to Compel filed by Principal Life Insurance Company. This Motion will be taken up at the hearing currently set for 9/8/2016 at 02:30 PM by Phone before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer. Counsel shall call the Court's AT&T conference line at 1-866-590-5055 and enter code 7013731 at the prompt. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 8/30/2016.
93
09/06/2016
REPLY re 89 MOTION to Compel filed by Principal Life Insurance Company.
1
Exhibit 1
1 Attachment
94
09/08/2016
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer: Motion Hearing held on 9/8/2016 re 89 MOTION to Compel filed by Principal Life Insurance Company. (Court Reporter Kelli Mulcahy/FTR Gold.)
95
09/12/2016
ORDER granting in part 89 Motion to Compel, and adjusting deadlines for completion of discovery relating to Class Certification issues. See order for particulars. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 9/12/2016.
96
09/30/2016
ORDER re 89 MOTION to Compel filed by Principal Life Insurance Company. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 9/30/2016.
97
11/16/2016
Joint MOTION To Set Class Certification Briefing Schedule by Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 12/5/2016
98
11/16/2016
TEXT ORDER granting 97 Joint Motion to Set Class Certification Briefing Schedule. Plaintiff's initial Motion and brief in support of class certification shall be filed on or before November 22, 2016; Principal Life's opposition to class certification shall be filed on or before January 3, 2017; and Plaintiff's reply brief shall be filed on or before January 31, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 11/16/2016.
99
11/18/2016
Unresisted MOTION for Leave to File under Seal Plaintiff's Unresisted Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification Under Seal by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 12/5/2016
100
11/21/2016
TEXT ORDER granting 99 Motion for Leave to File Under Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 11/21/2016.
101
11/22/2016
MOTION to Certify Class by Frederick Rozo. Responses due by 12/9/2016
1
Declaration of Nina Wasow
2
Declaration of Mark T. Johnson
3
Declaration of J. Barton Goplerud
4
Declaration of Christopher T. Micheletti
5
Signatory Attestation and Certificate of Service
5 Attachments
102
11/22/2016
Sealed Document re 101 MOTION to Certify Class (Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Class Certification) by Frederick Rozo.
103
11/22/2016
Sealed Document re 101 MOTION to Certify Class (Exhibits to Declaration of Nina Wasow in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification) by Frederick Rozo.
104
12/22/2016
Unresisted MOTION to file overlength brief, MOTION Adjust Class Certification Briefing Schedule by Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 1/5/2017. If service was made under FRCP 5(b)(2)(C) (mail), (D) (leaving with the clerk of court), or (F) (by delivering by other means consented to in writing), an additional three days is added after the period would otherwise expire under FRCP 6(a). The additional three days does not apply to service done electronically.
105
12/27/2016
TEXT ORDER granting 104 Motion to file overlength brief; granting 104 Motion to extend date to file overlength briefs by one day. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 12/27/2016.
106
01/04/2017
Unresisted MOTION to Amend/Correct Class Certification Briefing Schedule By Two Days by Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 1/18/2017. If service was made under FRCP 5(b)(2)(C) (mail), (D) (leaving with the clerk of court), or (F) (by delivering by other means consented to in writing), an additional three days is added after the period would otherwise expire under FRCP 6(a). The additional three days does not apply to service done electronically.
107
01/05/2017
TEXT ORDER granting 106 Motion for extension of deadlines. Principal Life's resistance is due January 6, 2017. Plaintiff's response shall be filed by February 3, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 1/5/2017.
108
01/06/2017
Sealed Document re 101 MOTION to Certify Class (Defendant's Memorandum In Opposition To Class Certification) by Principal Life Insurance Company.
109
01/06/2017
SEALED DECLARATION of Aaron Friedman re 108 Sealed Document by Principal Life Insurance Company. Modified on 1/9/2017 sealed entry per counsel. Modified on 1/10/2017 linked to motion 101.
110
01/06/2017
Sealed Document re 108 Sealed Document (Declaration Of Tara Amin In Support Of Defendant's Opposition To Plaintiff's Motion For Class Certification by Principal Life Insurance Company. Modified on 1/10/2017 linked to motion 101.
1
Exhibit 1
2
Exhibit 2
3
Exhibit 3
4
Exhibit 4
5
Exhibit 5
6
Exhibit 6
7
Exhibit 7
8
Exhibit 8
9
Exhibit 9
10
Exhibit 10
11
Exhibit 11
12
Exhibit 12
13
Exhibit 13
14
Exhibit 14
15
Exhibit 15
16
Exhibit 16
16 Attachments
111
01/10/2017
Unresisted MOTION for Leave to File A Corrected Declaration Of Aaron Friedman In Support Of Defendants Memorandum In Opposition To Plaintiffs Motion For Class Certification by Principal Life Insurance Company.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 1/24/2017. If service was made under FRCP 5(b)(2)(C) (mail), (D) (leaving with the clerk of court), or (F) (by delivering by other means consented to in writing), an additional three days is added after the period would otherwise expire under FRCP 6(a). The additional three days does not apply to service done electronically.
112
01/10/2017
Sealed Document re 109 Declaration, 111 Unresisted MOTION for Leave to File A Corrected Declaration Of Aaron Friedman In Support Of Defendants Memorandum In Opposition To Plaintiffs Motion For Class Certification (Declaration Of Aaron Friedman) by Principal Life Insurance Company.
113
01/10/2017
TEXT ORDER granting 111 Motion for Leave to File a corrected Declaration of Aaron Friedman. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 1/10/2017.
114
02/02/2017
Unresisted MOTION for Leave to File under Seal Reply in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification by Frederick Rozo.Motions referred to Celeste F. Bremer. Responses due by 2/16/2017. If service was made under FRCP 5(b)(2)(C) (mail), (D) (leaving with the clerk of court), or (F) (by delivering by other means consented to in writing), an additional three days is added after the period would otherwise expire under FRCP 6(a). The additional three days does not apply to service done electronically.
115
02/03/2017
TEXT ORDER granting [114] unresisted Motion for Leave to File Under Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer on 2/3/2017.
116
02/03/2017
Sealed Document re [101] MOTION to Certify Class Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion for Class Certification by Frederick Rozo.
117
02/03/2017
DECLARATION of Nina Wasow in Support of Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion for Class Certification re [116] Sealed Document by Frederick Rozo.
118
02/03/2017
Sealed Document re [117] Declaration of Nina Wasow in Support of Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion for Class Certification by Frederick Rozo.
Would you like this case removed from DocketBird? Request removal.