KIMBERLY ARNOLD Plaintiff,
v.
PFIZER, INC. Defendant.
Case No. 3:10-cv-01025-AC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
July 29, 2015
OPINION AND ORDER ON ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
ACOSTA, Magistrate Judge
On June 13, 2014, the jury returned a verdict against Defendant Pfizer, Inc. ("Pfizer") and in favor of Plaintiff Kimberly Arnold ("Arnold") on her claims of discrimination, failure to provide reasonable accommodation, and retaliation based on her disability under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S. C. § 12101 et. seq., and the Oregon Rehabilitation Act, OR. REV. STAT. § 659A.100 et. seq. Pursuant to the jury's verdict in this case, the court awarded $1,175,165.00, in damages, plus prejudgment and post-judgment interest as detailed in the judgment (Dkt. No. 319). Presently before the court is Arnold's Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs (Dkt. No.
Page 2
322) and Bill of Costs (Dkt. No. 320). Following completion of the briefing, the court conducted oral argument on July 9, 2015.
Arnold seeks a total of $482,589.00 in attorney fees, in addition to costs and expenses of $53,008.51. Pfizer does not contest that Arnold is the prevailing party and therefore is entitled to fees and costs, but does contest the reasonableness of the amount Arnold requests. For the reasons that follow, Arnold's motions are granted in part and denied in part.1
As the prevailing party, Arnold is entitled to recover her fees, expenses and costs pursuant to the fee-shifting provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 12205 (prevailing party entitled to fees, litigation expenses, and costs under ADA). Accord OR. REV. STAT. § 659A.885(1)(prevailing party entitled to attorney fees and costs); FED.R.CIV.P. 54 (prevailing party entitled to costs and attorney fees if provided by statute, rule or order); LR 54-1 & 54-3 (same).
The Ninth Circuit has adopted the "lodestar" method for calculating attorney fees. Fischer v. SJB-P.D. Inc., 214 F.3d 1115, 1119 (9th Cir. 2000)(ADA claim). That calculation multiplies a reasonable hourly rate by the number of hours reasonably expended in the litigation. Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433 (1983); Pennsylvania v. Del. Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546, 564 (1986). The court must then decide whether to enhance or reduce the lodestar figure by evaluating a number of factors. Moreno v. City of Sacramento, 534 F.3d 1106, 1111 (9th Cir. 2008); Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. There is a strong presumption that the lodestar method
Page 3
produces a reasonable figure, and should only be enhanced or reduced in exceptional circumstances. Del. Valley Citizens, 478 U.S. at 565; Fischer, 214 F.3d at 1119 n.4.
I. Reasonable Hourly Rate
A reasonable hourly rate is determined by looking to the "prevailing market rates in the relevant community" as well as the skill, experience, and reputation of the lawyer. Blum v. Stepson, 465 U.S. 886, 895 (1984); Gonzalez v. City of Maywood, 729 F.3d 1196, 1205 (9th Cir. 2013). The party requesting the fees has the burden of producing "satisfactory evidence," in addition to the affidavits of its counsel, that the requested rates are in step with those "prevailing in the community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation." Dang v. Cross, 422 F.3d 800, 814 (9th Cir. 2005)(quoting Blum, 465 U.S. at 895 n.11). The best evidence of the prevailing rate in Oregon is the periodic Economic Survey conducted by the Oregon State Bar. LR 54-3; Roberts v. Interstate Distrib. Co., 242 F.Supp.2d 850, 857 (D. Or. 2002); Wolfe v. City of Portland, Case No. 3:12-cv-02035-PK, 2013 WL 6002391, at *10 (D. Or. Nov. 8, 2013).
Plaintiff seeks fees for the work of four attorneys in this case, Daniel J. Snyder, Erin McCool, Cynthia Gaddis, and Carl Post.2 Plaintiff also seeks attorney fees for work performed in response to Pfizer's post-trial motions by the law firm of Hart Wagner, LLC.
Page 4
A. Daniel Snyder
Arnold's counsel, Daniel J. Snyder ("Snyder"), seeks $400 per hour for time spent on Arnold's claims. Snyder has been a practicing law in Portland, Oregon attorney for approximately 37 years, predominantly specializing in civil rights and employment litigation. The Oregon State Bar 2012 Economic Survey ("OSB 2012 Survey") provides hourly billing rate information by area of practice. For Portland, Oregon private practice attorneys who perform Civil Litigation, Plaintiff (excluding personal injury), the OSB 2012 Survey shows the average billing rate is $266 per hour, attorneys in the 75th percentile bill at $300 per hour, and attorneys in the 95th percentile bill at $400 per hour. The OSB 2012 Survey also shows the average hourly rate billed by attorneys in private practice generally with over 30 years of practice is $340 per hour and the median slightly higher at $350 per hour, with attorneys in the 75th percentile billing at $400 per hour, and 95th percentile billing at $500 per hour. Snyder acknowledges that he has been awarded fees at a rate of $350 per hour in other cases in this district. See, e.g., Wolfe, 2013 WL 6002391, at *10; Lenon v. Starbucks Corporation, Case. No. 3:11-cv-01085-BR, 2012 WL 1377042, at *3 (D. Or. Apr. 19, 2012). Snyder submits that he has increased his hourly rate to account for inflation and to more accurately reflect his "skills and experience." Dec. of Daniel Snyder in Supp. of Attorney Fees ("Snyder Dec") (Dkt. No. 325) ¶ 14. The court concludes that given Snyder's total years of practice and his experience and skill, compensation at $400 per hour is a reasonable hourly rate.
B. Erin McCool
Arnold requests a variable rate of $275-295 per hour for McCool. McCool is a graduate of the Marshall-Wythe School of Law at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, and has been an active member of the Oregon Bar since 2006. McCool has been admitted to practice
Page 5
in the United States District Court and the United States Court of Appeals since 2009. McCool served as a law clerk to the Honorable Rex Armstrong on the Oregon Court of Appeals for two years following her graduation from law school. McCool joined the Law Offices of Daniel Snyder as an associate attorney in 2009 and has since practiced civil litigation in Portland and has focused on employment law matters. McCool has also been active in the Portland legal community volunteering her time to a nonprofit and to a student mock-trial competition.
McCool worked on Arnold's case from 2011 to 2012, when she had five to six years of experience, and again in 2015 when she had eight years of experience and assisted with preparing the present attorney fee petition. Arnold requests an hourly rate of $275 for McCool's work performed in 2011-2012, and $295 for McCool's work performed in 2015. The OSB 2012 Survey provides that Portland attorneys with four to six years of experience, the average billing rate is $210 per hour, the 75th percentile is $250 per hour, and the 95th percentile is $295 per hour. Additionally, the OSB 2012 Survey demonstrates that for attorneys with seven to nine years of experience, the hourly billing rate is $295 for the 75th percentile, and $375 for the 95th percentile. Given McCool's background and experience, the court finds that a rate of $250 in 2011-2012, and $295 in 2015, or the equivalent of the 75th percentile, is reasonable and appropriate.
C. Cynthia Gaddis
Arnold requests a variable billing rate of $185-$225 per hour for work performed by Gaddis, Gaddis was admitted to practice in 2011, and began working for Snyder's law firm as an associate in 2012. Gaddis worked on Arnold's case in 2013-2015, when she had zero to three years of experience. Gaddis has been awarded fees at an hourly rate of $175-177 for work performed in 2012 and 2013 in other cases in this District. See, e.g., Wolfe, 2013 WL 6002391, at *11. The OSB 2012
Page 6
Survey reveals that for Portland-area attorneys with zero to three years of experience, the average hourly billing rate is $182, the 75th percentile is $198, and the 95th percentile is $246. The court concludes that based on Gaddis's experience and skills, the following rates are reasonable: $185 per hour for 2013, and $200 per hour for 2014 and 2015, The court finds these rates roughly equivalent to the average hourly rate for attorneys with similar years of practice, increasing slightly to reflect Gaddis's increased experience, and the rate is roughly equivalent to the 75th percentile for attorneys with three years' experience.
D. Carl Post
Arnold requests a variable billing rate of $275-295 for work performed by Post. Post is a graduate of the University of Oregon School of Law and has been an active member of the Oregon Bar since 2006. Post operated his own law firm in Medford, Oregon, from 2006 to 2009 during which time he handled employment, family, construction, and personal-injury matters. Post joined the Law Offices of Daniel Snyder in 2009 and has since practiced civil litigation in Portland with a focus on employment-law matters. Post has been recognized by Super Lawyers as a Rising Star in 2013, 2014, and 2015.
When Post performed work on Arnold's case from 2010 through 2013, Post had four to six years of experience, and in 2014 and 2015 had seven to nine years of experience. Again, the OSB 2012 Survey...
