Case No. C16-1897-JCC.

VICTOR SEMENYUK, Plaintiff, v. TATYANA ZAGREBELNY, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Foreclosure
Nature of Suit: 290 Real Property: Other
Source: PACER

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Victor Semenyuk, Plaintiff, represented by Stephen M. Hansen , LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN M. HANSEN.

Eastside Funding LLC, Plaintiff, represented by Stephen M. Hansen , LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN M. HANSEN.

Tatyana Zagrebelny, Defendant, Pro Se.

John Doe Zagrebelny, Defendant, Pro Se.


JOHN C. COUGHENOUR, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's supplemental declaration for fees (Dkt. No. 12), as requested by the Court (Dkt. No. 11 at 3). Attorney fees and costs for bringing a motion to remand are recoverable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) where the removing party "lacked an objectively reasonable basis for seeking removal." Martin v. Franklin Capitol Corp., 546 U.S. 132, 141 (2005). The Court has already determined removal was objectively unreasonable for numerous reasons. (Dkt. No. 11 at 2.) Plaintiff's counsel submits that she spent a total of 22 hours working on the motion to remand and her hourly billing rate is $175 per hour. (Dkt. No. 12 at 2.)

First, the Court must determine whether the requested number of hours is the same number of hours that reasonably competent counsel would have billed. Albion Pac. Prop. Res., LLC v. Seligman, 329 F.Supp.2d 1163, 1169 (N.D. Cal. 2004). "If the requested number of hours is greater than the number of hours reasonably competent counsel would have billed, then the Court should reduce the requested number of hours accordingly." Id. (citing Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983) (holding courts should exclude "excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary" hours)). The Court concludes that the number of hours requested is unreasonable and duplicative. For example, Plaintiff's counsel states that she spent 6 hours preparing the remand motion and 6 hours working on the remand motion. (Dkt. No. 12 at 2.) Moreover, 22 hours seems excessive considering the obvious and blatant removal issues on the face of the complaint. Therefore, because Plaintiff's counsel billed an unreasonable number of hours on this motion to remand, the Court reduces the requested hours to 11 hours. Second, the Court must determine a reasonable hourly rate. Albion, 329 F. Supp. 2d at 1169. The Court concludes that $175 per hour is reasonable.

Consequently, based on an hourly rate of $175 for 11 billable hours, attorney fees total $1,925. The Court also awards $129.50 for additional costs that were incurred for delivery of the remand motion to Defendants. Therefore, Plaintiff is AWARDED $2,054.50 in attorney fees and costs for bringing the motion to remand.


1000 Characters Remaining reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases