Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Doctors Medical Center of Modesto, Inc., A California Corporation v. Principal Life Insurance Company

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


March 22, 2011

DOCTORS MEDICAL CENTER OF MODESTO, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
PRINCIPAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, AND DOES 1 THROUGH 25, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER ON APPORTIONMENT OF COSTS FOR DISCOVERY MOTION

Pursuant to Rule 37(a)(5)(C), where a discovery motion is granted in part and denied in part, "the court may . . . after giving an opportunity to be heard, apportion the reasonable expenses for the motion." For all of the reasons stated in the Court's March 3, 2011, order regarding Defendant's Motion for Discovery (Doc. 31, 11:18-20 - 12:1-24), the Court finds that an apportionment of Defendant's expenses in bringing the motion is warranted. Defendant submitted two declarations regarding its expenses. (Docs. 33, 34.) Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to be heard as to the apportionment and filed objections regarding the amount of the expenses Defendant's counsel presented to the Court. (Doc. 35.)

Plaintiff's counsel asserts that expenses related to work performed by Defendant's attorney Julie Cloney should not be apportioned to Plaintiff because Ms. Cloney is not admitted to the California Bar, and she has not requested to represent Defendant in this matter on a pro hoc vice basis. Plaintiff's counsel also asserts that the hourly rate of $335 for Defendant's counsel Christopher Yoo is unreasonable.

There is no requirement under Rule 37(a)(5)(C) that the Court apportion to Plaintiff all of Defendant's expenses in bringing the motion. Compare Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A) (where motion granted, court "must . . . require the party or deponent whose conduct necessitated the motion . . . to pay the movant's reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion . . . ") with Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(C) (if the motion is granted in part, the court may "apportion the reasonable expenses for the motion"). Mr. Yoo states that he spent 2.1 hours preparing the discovery motion at issue. Given his hourly rate of $335, the expenses related to his work amount to $703.50. The Court finds that Plaintiff should be apportioned $500 of these expenses. (See Doc. 31.)

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5)(C), within 21 days from the date of this order, Plaintiff shall pay to Defendant the sum of $500 as an apportionment of the expenses associated with Defendant's Motion for Discovery.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

ie14hj

20110322

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.