D. Oregon cuts consumer protection fee award 10.4%, including for clerical work | LegalTime AI

D. Oregon cuts consumer protection fee award 10.4%, including for clerical work

Lunceford v. Carson et al, No. 3:22-cv-01387. District Court, D. Oregon, Judge Michael H. Simon. Decided . Read the opinion

Requested
$22,320
Awarded
$20,007
Cut
10.4%$2,313

Consumer protection

What happened

The plaintiff in a consumer protection case sought $22,320 in attorney fees. The court awarded $20,007, a reduction of $2,313. It applied a 10% reduction to the lodestar to account for clerical tasks in the timekeeping records and inadequate apportionment of time. The court also reduced the award for unrelated claims. The figures do not include costs.

What the court said

Clerical work billed as legal work · 10% reduction
To account for the clerical tasks in Plaintiff's timekeeping records and the inadequate apportionment of time, the Court applies a 10 percent "haircut" reduction to the lodestar.

The court also reduced the award for: unrelated claims.

Why it matters

The ruling shows that courts will reduce fee awards when time records include clerical tasks billed as legal work and do not adequately separate time among claims. A percentage reduction can address such recordkeeping issues even without an hour-by-hour review.

How to keep this out of your fee petition

  • Leave purely clerical work off the fee petition.
  • Describe paralegal tasks so the substantive work is clear.
  • Split mixed entries into their substantive and clerical parts.

Cite this ruling

Lunceford v. Carson, No. 3:22-cv-01387 (D. Or. Mar. 20, 2024)

See hourly rates the D. Oregon approves and attorney fee motions in Oregon federal courts.

Figures and quotes are taken from the opinion and checked against its text. Spot an error? Email team@legaltime.ai with the case name and we will correct it. Summaries of public court opinions. Not legal advice.

More rulings like this

All rulings in the Fee Cut Tracker