Elizabeth Wright v. ASI Lloyds

Summary

This Memorandum and Recommendation addresses the amount of taxable costs, attorneys’ fees, and expenses ASI Lloyds may recover after sanctions were imposed against plaintiff’s counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927. The court recommends awarding $9,799.55 in taxable costs and $112,405.50 in attorneys’ fees, denying prospective and conditional appellate fees, and adjusting the requested expenses to prevent double recovery. The underlying action involved homeowner insurance claims brought by Elizabeth Wright against ASI Lloyds.

Holdings

1. ASI is entitled to $9,799.55 in taxable costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1), because Wright did not object to the listed cost items.
2. ASI is entitled to $112,405.50 in reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees as a sanction under Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
3. ASI should not receive the requested $15,000 in prospective fees for responding to the motion to alter judgment or the requested $30,000 in conditional appellate fees.
4. A court imposing sanctions under Rule 11 or 28 U.S.C. § 1927 may award reasonable expenses caused by the improper conduct, including reasonable expert fees and other defense expenses not limited to the taxable costs listed in § 1920.
5. Wright's objection and motion to strike LaDonna G. Schexnyder's affidavit should be denied because the affidavit establishes the affiant's qualifications, gives opinions on the reasonableness and necessity of the fees, and identifies the basis for those opinions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether ASI should recover the uncontested taxable costs listed in its amended bill of costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1).
2. What amount of attorneys' fees was reasonable and necessary under the prior sanctions order, including whether reductions were required for excessive, vague, clerical, or duplicative time entries.
3. Whether ASI could recover prospective fees for responding to a motion to alter judgment and conditional appellate fees.
4. Whether ASI could recover reasonable defense expenses, including expert fees, travel expenses, research charges, and court fees, as sanctions under Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
5. Whether Wright's objection and motion to strike the affidavit supporting ASI's fee request should be denied.

Disposition

other