N.D. Texas cuts commercial fee award 6.3%, including for vague entries

What happened

McGuireWoods LLP, counsel for Mr. Cooper Group, sought $120,000 in fees for 222.1 hours. Judge Sidney A. Fitzwater awarded $112,463.61, a reduction of $7,536.39 or 6.3%. The court excluded 2.4 hours recorded as continued work on a motion to compel because the entry was too vague. It also found three January 12 and 13, 2026 entries on finalizing and filing the motion duplicative and mixing clerical and legal work, and applied a 50% reduction to those entries.

What the court said

But the court agrees that Mr. Cooper’s billing entry stating “continued work on motion to compel” is impermissibly vague and should be excluded.

Because these entries are duplicative and contain a mix of clerical and legal work, the court will apply a 50% reduction.

The court also reduced the award for: duplicative staffing.

Why it matters

The order shows that a single vague time entry can be struck entirely, and that entries combining clerical tasks with legal work may be halved even when the overall request is largely sustained. It signals that courts will examine individual line items, not just totals, when ruling on a fee petition.

How to keep this out of your fee petition

• Name the task, the document or person involved, and the purpose.
• Avoid stock phrases that could describe any day in any matter.
• Keep privileged detail general, but specific enough to show the work.

Cite this ruling

See hourly rates the N.D. Texas approves and attorney fee motions in Texas 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.