Upload
lekhue
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR., and LOUISIANA
STATE CONFERENCE OF THE
NAACP,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TOM SCHEDLER, in his official capacity as
the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY
SONNIER, in her official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Children & Family Services, and BRUCE D.
GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Health & Hospitals,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-
JCW
Section “H”
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SET ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Plaintiffs Luther Scott, Jr. and the Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
respectfully move the Court to fix attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law (Doc. No. 436), concluding that the Defendants violated the National Voter
Registration Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg, et. seq.
Accordingly, as set forth in the accompanying memorandum of law, Plaintiffs
seek attorneys’ fees in the amount of $2,894,514.80 and costs and expenses in the amount of
$141,907.35 from the Defendants. These amounts represent the lodestar amounts for hours spent
on prosecuting this action (adjusted by taking a discount of 10% of the entire amount), a
discounted payment for travel time (50 percent of the lodestar rate), and costs and expenses
incurred related to this action.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 4
The accompanying memorandum of law summarizes the totals for each category
of fees claimed and describes in detail how the amount for each category was calculated. The
requested out-of-district hourly rates are reflective of the specialized skills and experience of
counsel in this case and the unavailability of local counsel willing and able to take on this matter.
Further, the accompanying declarations from Plaintiffs’ counsel detail all requested fees, costs
and expenses incurred in litigating this action, reduced by removing duplicative or excessive
entries or charges and otherwise by the exercise of billing discretion.
The results achieved by Plaintiffs constituted an unequivocal victory, and the
requested fees are conservatively calculated, fully documented, and in all respects reasonable.
As requested by your Honor in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Doc. No. 436),
Plaintiffs respectfully submit this motion to set attorneys’ fees and costs and pray that the Court
award Plaintiffs’ the reasonable requested amounts in successfully litigating their claims.
Dated: February 26, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Dale E.Ho____________________
Dale E. Ho ([email protected])*
Natasha M. Korgaonkar
Debo P. Adegbile
Elise C. Boddie
Ryan P. Haygood ([email protected])*
NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.
(New York)
99 Hudson Street, Suite 1600
New York, NY 10013
212-965-2200
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Ronald Lawrence Wilson
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 4
Ronald L. Wilson, Attorney at Law
701 Poydras Street, Suite 4100
New Orleans, LA 70139
504-525-4361
Michael B. de Leeuw
Israel David ([email protected])*
Erica Sollie*
Jesse Ryan Loffler*
David Yellin*
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
One New York Plaza
New York, NY 10004
212-859-8000
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Sarah Brannon ([email protected])*
Niyati Shah ([email protected])*
Michelle Rupp ([email protected])*
Project Vote
1350 Eye Street NW, Suite 1250
Washington, DC 20005
202-546-4173
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 26th of February, 2013, I electronically filed the
foregoing Notice of Submission with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system,
which will send a notice of electronic filing to persons electronically noticed. I further
certify that I mailed the foregoing document and the notice of electronic filing by first
class mail to any non-CM/ECF participant.
/s/ Dale E. Ho____________
8863014
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR., and LOUISIANA
STATE CONFERENCE OF THE
NAACP,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TOM SCHEDLER, in his official capacity as
the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY
SONNIER, in her official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Children & Family Services, and BRUCE D.
GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Health & Hospitals,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-
JCW
Section “H”
NOTICE OF SUBMISSION
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiffs Luther Scott, Jr. and the Louisiana State
Conference of the NAACP will bring the attached Motion to Set Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
before the Honorable Judge Jane Triche Milazzo on the 26th day of February, 2013 at 10:00 a.m.
Dated: February 26, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Dale E.Ho____________________
Dale E. Ho ([email protected])*
Natasha M. Korgaonkar
Debo P. Adegbile
Elise C. Boddie
Ryan P. Haygood ([email protected])*
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-1 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 3
NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.
(New York)
99 Hudson Street, Suite 1600
New York, NY 10013
212-965-2200
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Ronald Lawrence Wilson
Ronald L. Wilson, Attorney at Law
701 Poydras Street, Suite 4100
New Orleans, LA 70139
504-525-4361
Michael B. de Leeuw
Israel David ([email protected])*
Erica Sollie*
Jesse Ryan Loffler*
David Yellin*
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
One New York Plaza
New York, NY 10004
212-859-8000
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Sarah Brannon ([email protected])*
Niyati Shah ([email protected])*
Michelle Rupp ([email protected])*
Project Vote
1350 Eye Street NW, Suite 1250
Washington, DC 20005
202-546-4173
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-1 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 26th of February, 2013, I electronically filed the
foregoing Notice of Submission with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system,
which will send a notice of electronic filing to persons electronically noticed. I further
certify that I mailed the foregoing document and the notice of electronic filing by first
class mail to any non-CM/ECF participant.
/s/ Dale E. Ho____________
8863006
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-1 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR., and LOUISIANA
STATE CONFERENCE OF THE
NAACP,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TOM SCHEDLER, in his official capacity as
the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY
SONNIER, in her official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Children & Family Services, and BRUCE D.
GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Health & Hospitals,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-
JCW
Section “H”
ORDER
On Plaintiffs’ Motion to Set Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, and having reviewed the
submissions of Plaintiffs counsel and applied the lodestar methodology, I find that both the
hourly rates charged by Plaintiffs’ counsel, and the hours attributable to the relevant tasks are
eminently reasonable, as are the requested expenses, and IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
attorneys’ fees and costs in favor of Plaintiffs pursuant to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law (Doc. No. 436) are set as follows:
1. Plaintiffs are awarded attorneys fees in the amount of $2,894,514.80.
2. Plaintiffs are awarded costs and expenses in the amount of $141,907.35.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-2 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 2
This ___ day of February, 2013.
____________________________________
HONORABLE JANE TRICHE MILAZZO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-2 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR., and LOUISIANA
STATE CONFERENCE OF THE
NAACP,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TOM SCHEDLER, in his official capacity as
the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY
SONNIER, in her official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Children & Family Services, and BRUCE D.
GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Health & Hospitals,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-
JCW
Section ―H‖
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SET
ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
On January 23, 2013, the Court issued Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Doc.
No. 436) holding that each of the Defendants had violated the National Voter Registration Act,
42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg et seq., and that Plaintiffs were entitled to reasonable attorneys‘ fees,
litigation expenses, and costs. As prevailing parties, Plaintiffs respectfully submit this
Memorandum of Law in support of Plaintiffs‘ motion to set attorneys‘ fees and costs and pray
that the Court award Plaintiffs‘ the reasonable requested amounts in successfully litigating their
claims.
This is the first case in the nation to be litigated to trial under the NVRA. As explained
below, this case already has had, and will continue to have, a significant impact on the ability of
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 29
2
Louisiana‘s most vulnerable citizens to register to vote, and thus, to exercise the most
fundamental right in our democracy. The significance of this Court‘s ruling interpreting the
NVRA will likely be felt beyond Louisiana. Moreover, this case was highly technical and
extremely complex. Despite considerable experience in civil rights litigation, Plaintiffs‘ local
counsel Ronald Wilson could not have litigated this case without the resources and support of a
large team of attorneys from outside of this district, who also brought unique expertise in voting
rights litigation and, specifically, experience with litigation under this particular statute.
Notably, the length of this litigation was due in part to the intransigence of Defendants, who
repeatedly rebuffed Plaintiffs‘ attempts to negotiate settlement, despite a number of undisputed
violations of the statute.
Plaintiffs seek attorneys‘ fees in the amount of $2,894,514.80and expenses in the amount
of $141,907.35. These amounts represent the lodestar amounts for hours spent on this litigation
(based on reduced, reasonable out-of-district hourly rates, as well as a careful exercise of billing
judgment, including (but not limited to), several exclusions for particular categories of attorney
time, and a further ten-percent (10%) across-the-board reduction by the three organizations and
firms representing Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs achieved total success in this litigation. Accordingly, no reduction in
the requested fees – beyond the voluntary reductions already taken by Plaintiffs – is necessary or
appropriate.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
I. The Underlying Litigation
Plaintiffs Luther Scott Jr. and the Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
(―Plaintiffs‖) brought this action on April 19, 2011, against Tom Schedler, in his official capacity
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 29
3
as the Louisiana Secretary of State (―SOS‖), Ruth Johnson,1 in her official capacity as Secretary
of the Louisiana Department of Children & Family Services (―DCFS‖), and Bruce D. Greenstein,
in his official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health & Hospitals (―DHH‖)
(collectively, ―Defendants‖), alleging that the Defendants had violated the NVRA, 42 U.S.C. §
1973gg et seq.2 Defendant SOS was responsible for coordinating the responsibilities of
Louisiana under the NVRA, and Defendants DCFS and DHH were considered mandatory voter
registration agencies under Louisiana law and administered a number of public assistance
programs including Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (―SNAP‖), the Family
Independence Temporary Assistance (―FITAP‖), Medicaid, the Woman, Infants and Children
Program (―WIC‖), and the Louisiana Children‘s Health Insurance Program (―LaCHIP‖).
Plaintiff Luther Scott Jr. is a recipient of benefits under the SNAP program.
During three separate transactions in 2009 and 2010, DCFS did not provide Mr. Scott the
information required under the NVRA. (Doc. No. 436, at 8-11). Plaintiff Louisiana State
Conference of the NAACP ―expended its limited resources, time, and money, to canvass and
conduct registrations outside of Louisiana DCFS and DHH offices‖ and, because of the failures
of those agencies — which failures were also traceable to Defendant SOS because of its failure
to coordinate their obligations under the NVRA — was ―forced to expend resources registering
Louisiana voters who would have already been registered if the Defendants had complied with
the NVRA.‖ (Doc. No. 436, at 18).
Prior to the filing of this action, Defendants DCFS and DHH systemically
violated the NVRA by, among others, failing to: i) set policies, practices, and procedures which
1 Secretary Johnson was replaced in her official capacity as Secretary of DCFS by Suzy Sonnier effective
July 31, 2012. 2 An additional plaintiff, Roy Ferrand, withdrew from the case prior to trial (Doc. No. 126), and Suzy
Sonnier, in her official capacity, was substituted for Ruth Johnson as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Children and Family Services as a defendant (Doc No. 363).
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 29
4
complied with the NVRA; ii) provide voter registration services with remote transactions; iii)
provide voter registration services with address changes or renewals of benefits; iv) provide
voter registration services unless the client checked the ―yes‖ box to a voter registration question
in a covered transaction; v) include a voter registration question in a number of forms; vi)
include disclaimers that registering to vote will not affect the ―amount‖ of assistance received;
and vii) provide the same level of assistance for voter registration as provided for benefits. (Doc.
No. 436, at 19-27). Defendant SOS failed to provide accurate and consistent training to the
agencies, if such trainings were conducted at all, and failed to ―engage in any other measures to
ensure that individual public assistance offices are complying with their responsibilities under
the NVRA.‖ (Doc. No. 436, at 28).
As litigation proceeded, Plaintiffs repeatedly attempted to settle this matter, only to see
those efforts rebuffed each time. First, before discovery had begun in earnest—and before the
parties had expended much time or resources on this matter—Plaintiffs repeatedly attempted to
engage in settlement negotiations, only for Defendants to cut off settlement conversations in
September 2011, refusing to even entertain the possibility of a settlement featuring continuing
jurisdiction by this Court—a form of relief that was ultimately awarded. See Ho Decl. ¶ 8,
Brannon Decl. ¶ 6. Next, after oral argument on partial summary judgment was conducted in
April 2012, this Court ordered further settlement discussions, and Plaintiffs once again expressed
their willingness to settle this matter. Defendants, however, once again refused to engage in
meaningful settlement conversations, and reiterated their refusal to even consider any settlement
involving continuing jurisdiction by this Court. See Ho Decl. ¶ 10, Brannon Decl. ¶ 6. Notably,
Defendants‘ repeatedly refused to engage in meaningful settlement conversations despite
numerous uncontested violations of the statute, set forth in the parties‘ Amended Pre-Trial Order,
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 29
5
see Doc. 373, at 12-21, and ultimately adopted by this Court‘s Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law, see Doc. 436, at 20, 25-26, 28.
Thus, this complex litigation lasted over 18 months, including: over one year of
discovery, with extensive document and electronic discovery (including several rounds of written
discovery requests served by both sides); several months of depositions; substantial discovery-
related litigation (including a successful motion to compel production of responsive documents
and to obtain a privilege log); cross-motions for partial summary judgment, granted in part for
Plaintiffs; and trial. The ECF docket in this case contains over 400 entries.
After a three day trial held in October 2012, this Court issued a permanent
injunction and its findings of fact and conclusions of law on January 23, 2013 and found that
Defendants DCFS and DHH came into substantial compliance only after this suit was filed, and
this, in addition to this Court‘s findings of fact and conclusions of law on Plaintiffs‘ allegations,
demonstrate that the Plaintiffs‘ suit was entirely successful — both by inducing DCFS and DHH
to come into compliance after filing of the suit, and in this Court‘s holdings after trial. (Doc. No.
436, at 32 (―It is undisputed that DHH and DCFS violated the NVRA prior to the filing of this
lawsuit. . . . It is evident that the SOS has failed to enforce the NVRA in Louisiana. Other than
publishing a manual on NVRA compliance and conducting sporadic and faulty training sessions,
the SOS has done nothing to ensure that the State comply with its NVRA obligations.‖)).
With the consent of all Defendants in this action, Plaintiffs filed an Ex Parte
Consent Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion to Set Attorneys‘ Fees and Costs (Doc.
No. 438) (the ―Extension Motion‖) and an Ex Parte Consent Motion to Expedite Submission
Date of the Extension Motion (Doc. No. 439) on Friday, February 8, 2013, requesting an
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 29
6
additional two weeks – until February 26, 2013 – to file a motion to set attorneys‘ fees and costs.
Your Honor granted those motions. (Doc. Nos. 440, 441).
This case has already had a substantial impact on the ability of Louisiana‘s most
vulnerable citizens to register to vote, and thus exercise the most precious right in our
democracy. Even before the decision on the merits, after this Complaint was filed in April 2011,
the number of voter registrations through public assistance offices increased seven-fold (when
comparing the third quarter of 2011 to the third quarter during the previous two years). See Pls.‘
Trial Exs. 54-55; Pls.‘ PFOF at 9, 29 (Doc. No. 372). Notably, this figure does not even include
voter registration forms submitted by public assistance clients through remote transactions (mail,
telephone, or internet). Prior to this case, Defendants refused to provide voter registration
services through such means, even though the vast majority of public assistance benefits
transactions are conducted remotely; this unlawful omission translated into hundreds of
thousands of Louisiana citizens being denied an opportunity to register to vote. Amended Pre-
Trial Order, Uncontested Facts 10-29 (Doc. No. 373). Furthermore, Defendants have also been
ordered to cure numerous other violations of the statute, which will further ensure that Louisiana
citizens are offered an opportunity to register to vote in accordance with federal law. (Doc. No.
436). Finally, the impact of this case will likely not be limited to Louisiana, as this Court‘s
rulings interpreting the scope of the NVRA and the requirements it places on state agencies will
also likely be influential in other district courts throughout the country.
The SOS filed a notice of appeal on February 19, 2013 and then also filed a
motion to a stay on February 22, 2013, stating that the Department of Health and Hospitals and
the Department of Children and Family Services have indicated that they do not intend to appeal
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 29
7
but rather, plan to certify compliance with the injunction to the court within the time permitted
by the court's order.
II. Plaintiffs‘ Counsel‘s Involvement in this Litigation
a. Plaintiffs’ Counsel
Counsel representing Plaintiffs throughout the litigation were comprised of
attorneys from four organizations and firms — the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational
Fund, Inc. (―LDF‖); Project Vote; Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP (―Fried Frank‖);
and Ronald Wilson — which together brought considerable experience in election
administration, voting rights, and complex federal litigation, as well as and local Louisiana
Practice. Plaintiffs‘ counsel also included an appropriate mix of attorney experience levels. The
Declarations of Michael de Leeuw, Sarah Brannon, Dale Ho, and Ronald Wilson describe the
qualifications and educational background of each attorney for whom Plaintiffs are seeking fees.
Litigating this complex matter required a large team of attorneys with substantial experience in
voting rights litigation, necessitating the participation of three organizations and firms from
outside of this district. As explained below, under these circumstances, awarding attorneys fees
in conformity with each attorney‘s home district is appropriate.
b. Hours Worked
Plaintiffs‘ counsel maintained detailed time records regarding their work in this
litigation. These records are attached as exhibits to the declarations of Plaintiffs‘ counsel, and
summarized in aggregate below. In total, Plaintiffs‘ counsel seek fees for a total of 7,312.6 hours
litigating this action to its successful conclusion, subject to certain exclusions described below.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 29
8
c. Hourly Rates for Plaintiffs’ Counsel
For the reasons explained below in Plaintiffs‘ Argument, the hourly rates
requested by Plaintiffs‘ counsel are based on prevailing market rates in the Plaintiffs‘ counsel‘s
―home‖ districts, subject to reasonable reductions as described in the accompanying declarations
of counsel. The requested rates are as follows:
Counsel (by Organization/Firm) Year of Graduation Hourly Rate
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
(Home District: Southern District of New York)
Israel David 1996 $650
Michael de Leeuw 1996 $650
Erica Sollie 2008 $400
David Yellin 2011 $280
Jesse Ryan Loffler 2011 $280
Joseph Chan (Litigation Support) N/A $280
Michael Deguzman (Paralegal) N/A $200
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
(Home District: Southern District of New York)
Ryan Haygood 2001 $600
Dale Ho 2005 $475
Natasha Korgaonkar 2007 $350
La Tanya Harry (Paralegal) 2007 $175
Dhiren Patel (Paralegal) N/A $175
Joseph Puma (Paralegal) N/A $175
Project Vote (Home District: District of the District
of Columbia)
Sarah Brannon 1999 $600
Nicole Kovite Zeitler 2006 $600
Niyati Shah 2005 $275
Michelle Rupp 2011 $280
Kelly Gerlach (Data Analyst) N/A $175
Law Offices of Ronald Wilson
(Home District: Eastern District of Louisiana)
Ronald Wilson 1975 $400
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 29
9
For time spent in travel, counsel are requesting rates discounted by fifty percent
(50%). Further, as set forth in the accompanying declarations, a number of attorneys, paralegals,
and other support staff assisted in review and management of the litigation and with filings, but
Plaintiffs‘ counsel voluntarily eliminated the hours billed by these individuals, as described more
fully in the accompanying declarations. See Declaration of Michael de Leeuw (―de Leeuw
Decl.‖); Declaration of Sarah Brannon (―Brannon Decl.‖); Declaration of Dale Ho (―Ho Decl.‖).
d. Expenses and Costs
As this Court‘s order permits recovery of litigation expenses and costs related to
this action (Doc. No. 436), this application also seeks reasonable expenses and costs, subject to a
number of voluntary exclusions set forth below. Itemizations of these expenses are also attached
as exhibits to the declarations of Plaintiffs‘ counsel.
ARGUMENT
As explained in detail below, Plaintiffs‘ requested amounts for fees and expenses are
eminently reasonable. The highly technical and complex nature of this case required the
participation of a large team of attorneys from outside of this district, who have expertise in
voting rights matters and trial practice, thus justifying the use counsel‘s home district rates in the
calculation of this fee award. Moreover, the number of hours for which Plaintiffs seek
compensation is eminently reasonable, particularly given the various exclusions and write-downs
that Plaintiffs have voluntarily adopted as an exercise of billing judgment.
I. Plaintiffs Are Entitled to the Requested Amount of Fees Under the Lodestar
Method
The Fifth Circuit uses the ―lodestar‖ method to calculate attorneys‘ fees, ―which
is applied by multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended by an appropriate hourly
rate.‖ Smith & Fuller, P.A. v. Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., 685 F.3d 486, 490 (5th Cir. 2012).
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 29
10
The ―linchpin of the reasonable fee is the lodestar calculation, a product of the hours reasonably
expended by the law firms and the reasonable hourly rate for their services.‖ McClain v. Lufkin
Indus., Inc., 649 F.3d 374, 381 (5th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 589 (2011). There is a
strong presumption that an award based on the lodestar method is a reasonable fee. See Smith &
Fuller, P.A., 685 F.3d at 490; see also Creecy v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 548 F. Supp. 2d
279, 283-84 (E.D. La. 2008). ―After the calculation of the lodestar, the burden then shifts to the
party opposing the fee to contest the reasonableness of the hourly rate requested or the
reasonableness of the hours expended ‗by affidavit or brief with sufficient specificity to give fee
applicants notice‘ of the objections.‖ Creecy, 548 F. Supp. 2d at 284 (citation omitted). As part
of the lodestar calculation, any charges for ―excessive, duplicative, or inadequately documented
work must be excluded.‖ McClain, 649 F.3d at 381.
a. Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s Hourly Rates are Reasonable
As an initial matter, Ronald Wilson‘s rates are reasonable and in accordance with
the rates that he normally charges and collects in this district. See Wilson Decl. ¶ 8.
With respect to out-of-district counsel, the Fifth Circuit has joined the majority of
its sister circuits in taking ―the position that out-of-district counsel may be entitled to the rates
they charge in their home districts‖ under certain circumstances, which are present here.
McClain, 649 F.3d at 381-82 (citing Hadix v. Johnson, 65 F.3d 532, 535 (6th Cir. 1995); Zolfo,
Cooper & Co. v. Sunbeam–Oster Co., 50 F.3d 253, 259–60 (3d Cir. 1995); Casey v. City of
Cabool, Mo., 12 F.3d 799, 805 (8th Cir.1993); Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v. Hanson, 859 F.2d 313,
317 (4th Cir. 1988); Maceira v. Pagan, 698 F.2d 38, 40 (1st Cir. 1983); Donnell v. United States,
682 F.2d 240, 252 (D.C. Cir. 1982); Chrapliwy v. Uniroyal, Inc., 670 F.2d 760, 768–69 (7th Cir.
1982)).
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 29
11
In McClain, the Fifth Circuit cites positively the Sixth Circuit‘s two-prong test to
determine the appropriateness of out-of-district rates. Applying this two-prong test, ―courts must
determine (1) whether hiring the out-of-town specialist was reasonable in the first instance, and
(2) whether the rates sought by the out-of-town specialist are reasonable for an attorney of his or
her degree of skill, experience, and reputation.‖ McClain, 649 F.3d at 382 (quoting Hadix, 65
F.3d at 535).
(i) Reliance on Out-of-Town Counsel
First, Plaintiffs‘ use of out-of-town counsel was reasonable, thus justifying the use
of out-of-town rates in this fee award. In considering whether to award out-of-town rates, courts
inquire whether ―there is reason to believe that competent counsel was readily available locally
at a lower charge or rate.‖ Hadix, 65 F.3d at 535. In McClain, the Fifth Circuit held that out-of-
town counsel‘s rates should serve as the starting point of its lodestar calculation, because, inter
alia, the successful plaintiffs in that case offered sufficient proof of the need for out-of-town
counsel, in form of declarations fro local lawyers ―who swore that no [local] attorneys were
willing and able to assist in such a large case that might drag on for years without any guarantee
of financial remuneration.‖ 649 F.3d at 383. Such rates are particularly appropriate in civil
rights matters such as this case, given the nature of the interests at stake. Where, as here, ―out-
of-district counsel are proven to be necessary to secure adequate representation for a civil rights
plaintiff, the rates charged by that firm are the starting point for the lodestar calculation.‖ Id.
Accordingly, the Fifth Circuit remanded for the district court to reconsider its reduction of out-
of-town counsel‘s rate from $650 per hour to $400 per hour. See id. at 382-84.
Thus, courts in this district and elsewhere have routinely awarded out-of-town
rates. See, e.g., Greater New Orleans Fair Hous. Action Ctr. v. St. Bernard Parish, Civ. A. No.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 29
12
06-7185, Doc. No. 381, at 35-37 (E.D. La. Sept. 1, 2010) (report and recommendation in civil
rights case, approving the use of hourly rates based on Washington, D.C. rates of up to $625 per
hour for out-of-district counsel, because out-of-town counsel served as lead counsel and had
specialized knowledge of the subject matter of the litigation); 2012 WL 4959636, at *7 (E.D. La.
Aug. 24, 2012), report and recommendation adopted, 2012 WL 4959633 (E.D. La. Oct. 17,
2012); Feinberg v. Hibernia Corp., 966 F. Supp. 442, 446 (E.D. La. 1997) (in complex securities
fraud class action, finding local rates to be ―unduly restrictive to out of state counsel‖ and that
―New York counsel pays New York rates in maintaining their law practices . . . [and] to restrict
New York counsel to the prevailing hourly charges in the less expensive New Orleans market
would be unduly unfair‖); Jeffers v. Clinton, 776 F. Supp. 465, 469 (E.D. Ark. 1991), vacated
and remanded on other grounds, judgment reinstated without change, 796 F. Supp 1202 (E.D.
Ark. 1992) (noting that the ―mammoth [Voting Rights Act] case could not have been undertaken
without the [NAACP] Legal Defense Fund‘s lawyers and resources,‖ that the ―expertise, energy,
and resources‖ of the LDF was instrumental in successfully prosecuting the case, and counsel‘s
―unique expertise‖ warranted the compensation of out-of-town attorneys at non-local rates).
This reasonableness standard for the use of out-of-town counsel is satisfied here.
As explained below, this complex voting rights case required a large team of practitioners with:
(i) substantial experience in this particular area of law; and (ii) the ability to commit significant
resources at the outset of the case. Here, as in McClain, local counsel were simply unavailable to
litigate this case. As explained in his declaration, William P. Quigley, who has practiced as a
public interest lawyer in southern Louisiana since 1977 and has been repeatedly recognized for
his work, Quigley Decl. at ¶¶ 2-5, states that ―there is a dearth of practitioners here who
specialize in voting rights and election law specifically, as LDF and its co-counsel do.‖ Quigley
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 29
13
Decl. at ¶ 8. Moreover, Mr. Quigley is aware of ―no attorneys in the Eastern District of
Louisiana who possess: (i) expertise in litigation under the NVRA, and (ii) sufficient time and
resources to serve as lead counsel in such a large case without any guarantee of financial
remuneration.‖ Quigley Decl. at ¶ 10. Mr. Quigley thus believes that it was ―reasonable that this
case was litigated by out-of-state attorneys, as local practitioners generally do not have both the
requisite specialization in the relevant area of law, along with the resources to undertake such a
lawsuit.‖ Quigley Decl. at ¶ 10.
Additionally, Ronald Wilson – local counsel in this matter since its inception –
has worked primarily on civil rights and other public interest cases in his nearly four decades of
practice in Louisiana, has participated in over thirteen voting rights cases in Louisiana, many
with LDF, and is well-recognized as a leader in the Louisiana legal community. Wilson Decl. at
¶¶ 10-13. Mr. Wilson concurs with Mr. Quigley that a voting rights claim such as the NVRA
claim at bar ―requires a significant investment of resources . . . invested upfront, and with
potentially no fees awarded at the end.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 15. Although there are civil rights
attorneys in Louisiana, ―there is a paucity of in-state practitioners here who could have served as
lead counsel in this case.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 16. In fact, even though Mr. Wilson has
considerable experience in civil rights cases, he affirms that he ―could not have litigated this case
without support‖ and ―[t]his is simply not an investment that a private practitioner in this District
could make independently.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 16. Simply put, Mr. Wilson explains that he, like
local practitioners, ―do[es] not have the time or resources to serve as lead counsel for indigent
clients in a case, such as this one, without any guarantee of remuneration‖ and, in fact, he is
―doubtful that even two private practitioners in the New Orleans area could have undertaken this
litigation together.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 16.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 13 of 29
14
Thus, it was reasonable that this case was litigated primarily by out-of-state
counsel. Wilson Decl. at ¶ 17. Plaintiffs‘ out-of-town counsel expended the bulk of the hours in
this case. LDF, Project Vote, and Fried Frank were able to commit significant resources to this
complex civil rights matter, and brought significant expertise and experience with respect to
voting rights litigation and/or trial practice. See, e.g., Ho Decl. ¶¶ 14, 30-35 (explaining LDF‘s
voting rights work and the experience of its attorneys); Rosenberg Decl ¶¶ 11 (describing
experience and qualifications of LDF attorneys who worked on this matter); Brannon Decl. ¶¶
10-18; de Leeuw Decl. ¶¶ 2-6. Under these circumstances, out-of-town rates are appropriate.
See McClain, 649 F.3d at 383 (awarding out-of-town rates for civil rights practitioners where
local counsel was unavailable); Greater New Orleans Fair Hous. Action Ctr., Civ. A. No. 06-
7185, Doc. No. 381, at 35-37 (awarding out-of-town rates where counsel brought special
expertise to case at bar); Jeffers, 776 F.Supp. at 469 (awarding out-of-town expenses to LDF
based on LDF‘s ―unique‖ ―expertise, energy, and resources‖).
First, Plaintiffs‘ use of out-of-town counsel was reasonable. Where, as here, there
is strong, uncontradicted evidence that plaintiffs were required to turn to out-of-district counsel
to litigate their claims – such necessity rendering plaintiffs engagement of counsel in this matter
reasonable, see Declaration of William P. Quigley, at ¶¶ 8-10 (―Quigley Decl.‖); Declaration of
Ronald Wilson, at ¶¶ 15-17 (―Wilson Decl.‖) — counsel‘s ―‗home‘ rates should be considered as
a starting point for calculating the lodestar amount.‖ McClain, 649 F.3d at 382. In McClain, for
example, the 5th Circuit remanded after the district court had reduced out-of-town counsel‘s rate
from $650 per hour to $400 per hour; the Fifth Circuit held that the district court erred by failing
to use out-of-town counsel‘s rates as the starting point of its lodestar calculation. See id. at 382-
84; see also Greater New Orleans Fair Hous. Action Ctr. v. St. Bernard Parish, Civ. A. No. 06-
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 14 of 29
15
7185, 2012 WL 4959636, at *7 (E.D. La. Aug. 24, 2012), report and recommendation adopted,
2012 WL 4959633 (E.D. La. Oct. 17, 2012) (in Fair Housing Act civil rights case, approving the
use of hourly rates based on Washington D.C. rates up to $625 per hour for out-of-district
counsel); Greater New Orleans Fair Hous. Action Ctr. v. St. Bernard Parish, Civ. A. No. 06-
7185 (E.D. La. Sept. 1, 2010) (Doc. No. 381, at 14, 35-37; Doc. No. 381-1, Ex. A at 1), report
and recommendation adopted, (E.D. La. Oct. 17, 2012) (Doc. No. 394) (in earlier related
proceeding in Fair Housing Act case, approving use of Washington D.C. rates – up to $625 per
hour for the lead partner – for firm with specialized skills where local counsel could not be
located); Feinberg v. Hibernia Corp., 966 F. Supp. 442, 446 (E.D. La. 1997) (in complex
securities fraud class action, the court found local rates to be ―unduly restrictive to out of state
counsel‖ and ―New York counsel pays New York rates in maintaining their law practices . . .
[and] to restrict New York counsel to the prevailing hourly charges in the less expensive New
Orleans market would be unduly unfair‖); Jeffers v. Clinton, 776 F. Supp. 465, 469 (E.D. Ark.
1991), vacated and remanded on other grounds, judgment reinstated without change, 796 F. Supp
1202 (E.D. Ark. 1992) (noting that the ―mammoth [Voting Rights Act] case could not have been
undertaken without the [NAACP] Legal Defense Fund‘s lawyers and resources,‖ that the
―expertise, energy, and resources‖ of the LDF was instrumental in successfully prosecuting the
case, and counsel‘s ―unique expertise‖ warranted the compensation of out-of-town attorneys at
non-local rates).
In considering whether to award out-of-town rates, courts first determine
―whether hiring the out-of-town specialist was reasonable in the first instance.‖ McClain, 649
F.3d at 382 (quoting Hadix, 65 F.3d at 535)). Thus courts inquire whether ―there is reason to
believe that competent counsel was readily available locally at a lower charge or rate.‖ Hadix,
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 15 of 29
16
65 F.3d at 535; see also McClain, 649 F.3d at 383 (successful plaintiffs offered sufficient proofs
in form of local lawyers ―who swore that no Texas attorneys were willing and able to assist in
such a large case that might drag on for years without any guarantee of financial remuneration‖).
The Declarations of William P. Quigley and Ronald Wilson demonstrate that this
standard was met in this case. For example, William P. Quigley, who has practiced as a public
interest lawyer in southern Louisiana since 1977 and has been repeatedly recognized for his
work, Quigley Decl. at ¶¶ 2-5, explains that although there are Louisiana attorneys with general
civil rights experience, ―there is a dearth of practitioners here who specialize in voting rights and
election law specifically, as LDF and its co-counsel do.‖ Quigley Decl. at ¶ 8. Moreover, Mr.
Quigley was aware of ―no attorneys in the Eastern District of Louisiana who possess: (i)
expertise in litigation under the NVRA, and (ii) sufficient time and resources to serve as lead
counsel in such a large case without any guarantee of financial remuneration.‖ Quigley Decl. at
¶ 10. Mr. Quigley thus believed that it was ―reasonable that this case was litigated by out-of-
state attorneys, as local practitioners generally do not have both the requisite specialization in the
relevant area of law, along with the resources to undertake such a lawsuit.‖ Quigley Decl. at
¶ 10.
Additionally, Ronald Wilson – local counsel in this matter since its inception –
has worked primarily on civil rights and other public interest cases in his nearly four decades of
practice in Louisiana, has participated in over thirteen voting rights cases in Louisiana, many
with LDF, and is well-recognized as a leader in the Louisiana legal community. Wilson Decl. at
¶¶ 10-13. Mr. Wilson concurs with Mr. Quigley that a voting rights claim such as the NVRA
claim at bar ―requires a significant investment of resources . . . invested upfront, and with
potentially no fees awarded at the end.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 15. Although there are civil rights
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 16 of 29
17
attorneys in Louisiana, ―there is a paucity of in-state practitioners here who could have served as
lead counsel in this case.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 16. In fact, even though Mr. Wilson has
considerable experience in civil rights cases, he affirms that he ―could not have litigated this case
without support‖ and ―[t]his is simply not an investment that a private practitioner in this District
could make independently.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 16. Simply put, Mr. Wilson explains that he, ―as
most private practitioners, do not have the time or resources to serve as lead counsel for indigent
clients in a case, such as this one, without any guarantee of remuneration‖ and, in fact, he is
―doubtful that even two private practitioners in the New Orleans area could have undertaken this
litigation together.‖ Wilson Decl. at ¶ 16. Therefore, it was reasonable that this case was
litigated by plaintiffs‘ out-of-state counsel. Wilson Decl. at ¶ 17.
(ii) The Reasonableness of Counsel‘s Rates
The second inquiry is ―whether the rates sought by the out-of-town specialist are
reasonable for an attorney of his or her degree of skill, experience, and reputation.‖ McClain,
649 F.3d at 382 (quoting Hadix, 65 F.3d at 535)). This Court has considerable discretion in
fashioning a fair and reasonable award of attorneys‘ fees and costs for prosecuting this complex,
time-consuming, and ultimately entirely successful litigation. See id. (―[A]ppellate courts should
be particularly reluctant to find an abuse of discretion. . . . [T]he district court retains discretion
to adjust the lodestar and achieve an overall reasonable fee award.‖); see also Nat’l Wildlife
Fed’n, 859 F.2d at 317 (―The computation of attorneys fees is primarily the task of the district
court, and we are not entitled to disturb a district court‘s exercise of discretion even though we
might have exercised that discretion quite differently.‖).3
3 Although Plaintiffs‘ counsel believes out-of-market rates are warranted in this case, even if the Court were
to be inclined to look at New Orleans rates, the requested rates – already discounted voluntarily by counsel – are not
unreasonable by comparison. See Wagner v. Boh Bros. Const. Co., LLC., Civ. A. No. 11-2030, 2012 WL 3637392,
at *14 (E.D. La. Aug. 22, 2012) (Wilkinson, J.) (collecting cases in New Orleans area finding reasonable rates for
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 17 of 29
18
Here, the rates sought by Plaintiffs‘ counsel are generally below market for
attorneys experienced in complex litigation generally and voting rights litigation in particular,
and thus well within reason. First, for purposes of this litigation, Fried Frank has dramatically
lowered its rates below what the firm normally charges and collects for its attorneys‘ time. See
de Leeuw Decl. ¶¶ 3-4, 9, 11.
Similarly, LDF‘s rates are well-below market for experienced practitioners of
complex civil litigation in New York. See, e.g., Declaration of Ezra D. Rosenberg at ¶¶ 13-14
(―Rosenberg Decl.‖); Declaration of Adam Klein at ¶¶ 10-11 (―Klein Decl.‖); Declaration of
Cyrus Mehri at ¶¶ 6-8 (―Mehri Decl.‖); Ho Decl. at ¶¶ 25-28. Indeed, LDF attorneys Dale Ho
and Ryan Haygood are former associates at Fried Frank, and their requested rates in this matter
are well below what Fried Frank would currently charge for their work. See de Leeuw Decl. ¶¶
3-5, 9-10. Moreover, the rates sought by LDF of $350 to $600 per hour are within the range of
rates awarded in civil rights litigation by New York courts. See, e.g., Vilkhu v. The City of New
York, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73696 at *13 (E.D.N.Y. June 26, 2009) (describing the range of
rates paid to experienced civil rights attorneys as ―$250 to $600 . . . with average awards
increasing over time.‖); Rozell v. Ross-Holst, 576 F. Supp.2d 527, 546 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)
(awarding an experienced civil rights litigator fees at $600 per hour).
And, Project Vote‘s rates are similarly below what comparable firms would
charge in the Washington, D.C. market. See Brannon Decl. ¶¶ 21-25; Mehri Decl. ¶¶ 5-8.
Furthermore, the rates sought by Project Vote of $280 to $600 per hour are within the range for
D.C.-based attorneys as set forth under the Updated Laffey Matrix, on which the U.S. District
Court for the District for the District of Columbia frequently relies when awarding attorneys‘
attorneys up to $450 per hour for partner-level attorneys, and up to $112 per hour for paralegal work). Moreover,
even under the Johnson factors, discussed infra, ―[b]ecause the lodestar is presumptively reasonable, it should be
modified only in exceptional cases.‖ Wagner, 2012 WL 3637392, at *13.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 18 of 29
19
fees. See Adjusted Laffey Matrix, available at http://laffeymatrix.com/see.html (setting rates for
attorneys of comparable experience levels at $312 to $625 per hour); Ricks v. Barnes, No. 05-
1756 HHK/DAR, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22410, at *16 (D.D.C. Mar. 28, 2007) (finding
Updated Laffey Matrix rates reasonable); Smith v. District of Columbia, 466 F. Supp. 2d 151,
156 (D.D.C. 2006) (concluding that use of the Updated Laffey Matrix is reasonable‖).
Accordingly, all of the rates sought by Plaintiff‘s counsel are eminently
reasonable for the markets in which these attorneys practice.
b. Plaintiffs’ Counsel Worked Reasonable Hours, and This Time Should be
Fully Compensated
As a general proposition, all time that is excessive, duplicative or inadequately
documented should be excluded. See Wagner v. Boh Bros. Const. Co., LLC., Civ. A. No. 11-
2030, 2012 WL 3637392, at *15 (E.D. La. Aug. 22, 2012). Further, attorneys should ―exercise
‗billing judgment‘ by ‗writing off unproductive, excessive, or redundant hours‘ when seeking fee
awards.‖ Id. (quoting Green v. Administrators of the Tulane Educ. Fund, 284 F.3d 642, 662 (5th
Cir. 2002)).
As described in the accompanying declarations of Plaintiffs‘ counsel, Plaintiffs
have conservatively calculated the number of hours claimed in this fee application. See de
Leeuw Decl. at ¶¶ 9, 11; Brannon Decl. at ¶¶ 9; Ho Decl. at ¶¶ 20; Wilson Decl. at ¶¶ 6-8.
Counsel have reviewed their time records and exercised billing judgment to eliminate or reduce
time entries that could arguably be considered unproductive, duplicative, or excessive.
Additionally, counsel have voluntarily reduced their hours worked in the following respects: (i)
with respect to LDF and Project Vote, eliminating any time billed in investigating the claims
underlying this case, for purposes of drafting and filing the complaint, prior to the filing of the
Complaint on April 19, 2011; (ii) with respect to LDF and Project Vote, omitting time spent by
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 19 of 29
20
senior staff at reviewing and editing the briefing at the various stages of litigation; (iii) with
respect to LDF and Project Vote, writing off any additional attorney time whenever more than
two attorneys from either of their respective organizations attended a deposition; (iv) with
respect to Fried Frank, omitting time spent by paralegals helping on the matter, as needed from
time to time, and certain individuals from Fried Frank‘s Managing Attorneys Office, which
helped coordinate and file the numerous documents and briefing submitted in this case; (v) with
respect to all three organizations, billing travel time to and from Louisiana at one-half the
respective rates sought for attorneys in this litigation; (vi) with respect to all three organizations,
writing off all time in connection with the preparation and filing the instant fee application,
including the time expended gathering and reviewing counsel‘s records concerning work hours
and litigation expenses; (vii) with respect to all three organizations, writing off an additional ten
percent (10%) of the fees request as an exercise of billing judgment and to account for any
potential duplication. With these voluntary reductions, no further reductions are required.
c. Fees & Expenses Calculations
The ―lodestar‖ method ―is applied by multiplying the number of hours reasonably
expended by an appropriate hourly rate.‖ Smith & Fuller, P.A., 685 F.3d at 486. As discussed
above, Plaintiffs‘ counsel seeks an appropriate hourly rate for this case and the hours expended
and fees incurred in this action were eminently reasonable.4 The Court also ordered in the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Doc. No. 436) that Plaintiffs be awarded costs and
4 Plaintiffs‘ counsel LDF and Project Vote have not included any time or expenses associated with the re-
depositions taken as a result of the grant of their motion for sanctions. (Doc. No. 423).
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 20 of 29
21
expenses in prosecuting this action. Thus, the attorneys‘ fees and expenses are calculated, by
counsel affiliation and cumulatively, as follows:5
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Name Hours Rate Total
Israel David 58.3 $650 $30,095
Michael de Leeuw 459.7 $650 $288,730
Erica Sollie 308.2 $400 $118,140
David Yellin 389.6 $280 $107,268
Jesse Ryan Loffler 282.8 $280 $77,140
Michael Deguzman 18.7 $200 $3,740
Joseph Chan 12.4 $180 $2,232
Total 1555.4 $627,345
Total (less 10% voluntary reduction) $564,610.50
NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.
Name Hours Rate Total
Ryan Haygood 185 $600 $110,000.00
Dale Ho 1414.3 $475 $671,792.50
Natasha Korgaonkar 922.3 $350 $322,805.00
Dhiren Patel 31.5 $175 $5,512.50
La Tanya Harry 62.1 $175 $10,867.50
Joseph Puma 260 $175 $45,500.00
Total 2875.2 $1,166,477.50
Total (less 10% voluntary reduction) $1,049,829.80
Project Vote
Name Hours Rate Total
Sarah Brannon 702.1 $600 $394,310
Nicole Zeitler 638.8 $600 $369,630
Niyati Shah 781.9 $475 $354,540
Michelle Rupp 560.0 $280 $151,515
Kelly Gerlach 22.0 $175 $3,850
5 Note that the totals take into account a voluntary fifty percent (50%) reduction in the lodestar rate for any
travel time, and therefore, the total column may be less than a straight multiplication of the hours and rates, as set
forth in the exhibits to the accompanying declarations of plaintiffs‘ counsel.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 21 of 29
22
Total 2,704.8 $1,273,845
Total (less 10% voluntary reduction) $1,146,460
Law Offices of Ron Wilson
Name Hours Rate Total
Ron Wilson 177.2 $400 $70,880.00
Total 177.2 $70,880.00
Expenses
Counsel Total Expenses
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP $49,838.96
NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. $60,939.44
Project Vote $31,128.95
Law Offices of Ron Wilson N/A
Total Expenses $141,907.35
Thus, the total fees, costs, and expenses incurred are $564,610.50 by Fried, Frank,
Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, $1,049,829.80 by NAACP Legal Defense and Educational
Fund, Inc., $1,146,460.00 by Project Vote, and $70,880.00 by the Law Offices of Ron Wilson,
for a cumulative total of $2,894,514.80. In addition to the already reasonable reductions made,
Plaintiffs‘ counsel from LDF, Project Vote, and Fried Frank will voluntarily reduce the requested
amount by a ten percent (10%) across-the-board cut to the fee request, as reflected in the tables
above, as an exercise in billing judgment and to eliminate any duplicative or excessive hours
billed. Thus, the total fees, expenses and costs requested by Plaintiffs are $141,907.35, of which
each Defendant is responsible for one-third. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court award
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 22 of 29
23
Plaintiffs‘ these reasonable requested fees and expenses incurred in successfully litigating their
claims.6
II. The Lodestar Calculation Need Not be Adjusted
After the lodestar is calculated, ―which [lodestar calculation] is presumptively
reasonable,‖ the amount can be ―adjusted upward or downward by the district court based on the
district court‘s considerations of the [Fifth Circuit‘s] Johnson factors.‖ Wagner v. Boh Bros.
Const. Co., LLC., Civ. A. No. 11-2030, 2012 WL 3637392, at *12 (E.D. La. Aug. 22, 2012)
(citing Johnson v. Ga. Highway Express, Inc., 488 F.2d 714, 717-19 (5th Cir. 1974)). The
twelve Johnson factors are:
(1) the time and labor required for the litigation; (2) the novelty and difficulty of
the questions presented; (3) the skill required to perform the legal services
properly; (4) the preclusion of other employment by the attorney by acceptance of
the case; (5) the customary fee; (6) whether the fee is fixed or contingent; (7) time
limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; (8) the amount involved and
the result obtained; (9) the experience, reputation and ability of the attorneys; (10)
the ―undesirability‖ of the case; (11) the nature and length of the professional
relationship with the client; and (12) awards in similar cases.
Id.; see also Crosby v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana, Civ. A. No. 08-0693, 2013 WL
139805, at *1 n.1 (E.D. La. Jan. 10, 2013).7 However, ―[b]ecause the lodestar is presumptively
reasonable, it should be modified only in exceptional cases.‖ Wagner, 2012 WL 3637392, at *13
(emphasis added). Moreover, after the party seeking attorneys‘ fees has submitted adequate
documentation of the hours reasonably expended and the qualifications of the attorneys, ―the
party seeking reduction of the lodestar bears the burden of showing that a reduction is
warranted.‖ Id.
6 Additionally details concerning these fees, costs and expenses are set forth in the accompanying
declarations of Plaintiffs‘ counsel. Further details, if necessary, can be provided based on contemporaneous records
maintained by Plaintiffs‘ counsel. 7 After Johnson was decided, the Supreme Court ―barred any use of the sixth factor, whether the fee is fixed
or contingent.‖ Wagner, 2012 WL 3637392, at *13 (citing Walker v. U.S. Dep’t of Housing & Urban Dev., 99 F.3d
761, 772 (5th Cir. 1996) (internal citation omitted).
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 23 of 29
24
The Fifth Circuit has instructed that, of the Johnson factors, the Court should give
special heed to: i) the time and labor involved; ii) the customary fee; iii) the amount involved and
the result obtained; and iv) the experience, reputation, and ability of counsel. Id. (citing Migis v.
Pearle Vision, Inc., 135 F.3d 1041, 1047 (5th Cir. 1998). It is without question that the result
obtained in the litigation was entirely on the side of the Plaintiffs. Counsel for Plaintiffs — with
significant experience handling voting and civil rights, and complex federal litigations —
diligently prosecuted this action, engaged in extensive fact discovery, and put on an ultimately
successful trial – all less than two years after filing the complaint, which itself required extensive
investigation prior to filing. Moreover, the result in this case is of both local and national
significance – it not only vindicates the rights of multitudes of Louisiana voters under the
NVRA, but also serves as a roadmap to compliance with the NVRA nationally, and as the only
Section 7 case to go to and complete trial, is of particular import for potential litigants seeking to
enforce their NVRA-related rights.
The same justifications weigh in favor of factors 3, 7, and 11; Plaintiffs‘ counsel
worked diligently on behalf of Plaintiffs to analyze numerous policies, practices, and forms — in
addition to successfully securing NVRA-related rights for public assistance beneficiaries
connecting with the agencies remotely, often using technology that did not exist when the NVRA
was passed — with no assurance they would be compensated for the time dedicated to the
litigation or reimbursement for the substantial litigation expenses of prosecuting this action
outside of their ―home‖ districts, and completed an extensive amount of discovery and legal
briefing under relatively short time limitations. Moreover, as this was the first time a case
proceeded to trial under Section 7 of the NVRA, plaintiffs‘ counsel had even less assurance of
compensation.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 24 of 29
25
It is also well-established that cases vindicating civil rights are often
―undesirable‖ for attorneys because their ―decision to help eradicate discrimination is not
pleasantly received.‖ Johnson, 488 F.2d at 719. Despite their total vindication and success in
this matter, Plaintiffs‘ attempt to secure and enhance voting rights for the most vulnerable
Louisianans was not received well, as indicated by the Declarations of William Quigley and
Ronald Wilson, describing the unavailability of local counsel — as well as the fact that
Defendants often fought tooth and nail over even innocuous matters such as an amendment of
the case caption to accurately reflect the parties to the matter. Indeed, as noted, Plaintiffs
repeatedly attempted to settle this litigation before discovery began in earnest and the parties
expended much time or resources on this matter, see Ho Decl. ¶ 8, Brannon Decl. ¶ 6, and
attempted to do so again after partial summary judgment briefing, see Ho Decl. ¶ 10, Brannon
Decl. ¶ 6, only to be rebuffed on both occasions. Defendants repeatedly refused to even consider
any settlement featuring continuing jurisdiction by this Court—a form of relief that, as noted,
was ultimately ordered—despite the fact that Defendants‘ did not dispute numerous facts
indicating violations of the statute.
Further, ―[t]hree of the Johnson factors, complexity of the issues, results obtained
and preclusion of other employment, are presumably fully reflected and subsumed in the lodestar
amount.‖ Id. (citing Heidtman v. County of El Paso, 171 F.3d 1038, 1043 (5th Cir. 1999)).
Finally, awards in similar and analogous cases demonstrate that Plaintiffs‘
requested amounts in this case are eminently reasonable. See Valdez v. Herrera, No. 09-cv-668
JCH/DJS (D.N.M. Mar. 13, 2012) (Doc. No. 171) (awarding plaintiffs fees and costs in a case
involving Section 7 of the NVRA – which was resolved on summary judgment and settlement);
see also Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. v. Texas Dep’t of Housing & Community Affairs,
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 25 of 29
26
No. 3:08-cv-00546 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 15, 2013) (Doc. No. 214) (awarding attorneys‘ fees of
$1,869,577 and costs of $24,392 for success on the merits after a bench trial challenging race
discrimination in allocation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits); Graves v. Barnes, 700 F.2d
220, 221 (5th Cir. 1983) (affirming, after reducing by $2,300, an award of approximately
$948,700 in voting rights case); Lochren v. County of Suffolk, 344 F. App‘x 706, 707 (2d Cir.
2009) (the district court awarded $578,704.14 in attorneys‘ fees and costs in civil rights suit
regarding female advancement in police department; vacating and remanding for recalculation to
add amounts by applying 2008 rather than 2006 rates, and to add fees for a reply paper in the fee
application); Butler v. MBNA Tech. Inc., 140 F. App‘x 542, 543 (5th Cir. 2005) (in Title VII
claim, awarded fees of $265,205.07 for requested amounts only from the end of discovery
through completion of trial); Lalla v. City of New Orleans, 161 F. Supp. 2d 686, 713 (E.D. La.
2001) (in civil rights claims of racial discrimination against city, awarding plaintiffs attorneys‘
fees in the total amount of $250,922.34 and costs in the amount of $9,147.37 where claims were
decided on summary judgment and settled prior to trial).
Even if the Court were to consider the Johnson factors — which it should not
because ―the lodestar is presumptively reasonable‖ and under Johnson, ―it should be modified
only in exceptional cases,‖ Wagner, 2012 WL 3637392, at *13 — these factors weigh in favor of
awarding Plaintiffs the lodestar amount calculated with a reasonable rate based on counsel‘s
rates set forth above, and the reasonable hours expended in this litigation.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs respectfully request an award of reasonable
attorneys‘ fees in the amount of $2,894,514.80 and expenses in the amount of $141,907.35
incurred in connection with this litigation.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 26 of 29
27
Dated: February 26, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
__/s/ Dale E. Ho _________________
Dale E. Ho ([email protected])*
Natasha M. Korgaonkar
Debo P. Adegbile
Elise C. Boddie
Ryan P. Haygood ([email protected])*
NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.
(New York)
99 Hudson Street, Suite 1600
New York, NY 10013
212-965-2200
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Ronald Lawrence Wilson
Ronald L. Wilson, Attorney at Law
701 Poydras Street, Suite 4100
New Orleans, LA 70139
504-525-4361
Michael B. de Leeuw
Israel David ([email protected])*
Erica Sollie*
Jesse Ryan Loffler*
David Yellin*
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
One New York Plaza
New York, NY 10004
212-859-8000
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Sarah Brannon ([email protected])*
Niyati Shah ([email protected])*
Michelle Rupp ([email protected])*
Project Vote
1350 Eye Street NW, Suite 1250
Washington, DC 20005
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 27 of 29
28
202-546-4173
*MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
GRANTED
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 28 of 29
29
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 26th of February, 2013, I electronically filed the
foregoing Notice of Submission with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system,
which will send a notice of electronic filing to persons electronically noticed. I further
certify that I mailed the foregoing document and the notice of electronic filing by first
class mail to any non-CM/ECF participant.
__/s/ Dale E. Ho_______________
8863590
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-3 Filed 02/26/13 Page 29 of 29
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR. and the LOUISIANA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP, Plaintiffs,
v. TOM SCHEDLER in his official capacity as the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY SONNIER, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Children & Family Services, and BRUCE D. GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health & Hospitals, Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW
DECLARATION OF EZRA D. ROSENBERG
I, Ezra D. Rosenberg, hereby declare the following: 1. I have been asked by attorneys for the NAACP Legal Defense and
Educational Fund, Inc. (“LDF”) to provide information, based on my personal knowledge
and belief, and my opinions regarding the reasonableness of the hourly rates that they
seek to have recognized in the petition for attorneys’ fees in this case.
2. I am a partner at Dechert LLP (“Dechert”), a leading international law
firm with 26 offices around the world and throughout the United States, including:
Austin; Boston; Charlotte; Chicago; Hartford; Los Angeles; New York; Orange County;
Philadelphia; Princeton; San Francisco; Silicon Valley; and Washington, D.C. Founded
in 1875, the firm has more than 900 lawyers. Dechert is consistently ranked among the
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-5 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 7
2
leading law firms in each of its core practice areas of corporate and securities, financial
services and investment management, intellectual property, litigation and government
enforcement, real estate and structured finance. Dechert has earned honors from industry
publications including Chambers, The American Lawyer, Best Lawyers, Bloomberg,
Thomson Reuters, The Legal 500, Benchmark Litigation and Law360.
3. Dechert also has a longstanding tradition of providing pro bono legal
services to individuals and organizations who cannot otherwise afford legal counsel.
Firm recognition for our pro bono efforts has included: the Pro Bono Project’s
Distinguished Service Award (New Orleans); the American Civil Liberties Union – New
Jersey’s Legal Leadership Award; The American Lawyer’s Pro Bono Rankings, Ranked
#7 out of 200 U.S. firms for Pro Bono (2012); the Citizens Bank Pro Bono Award
(Philadelphia); the City Bar Justice Center’s Jeremy G. Epstein Award for Pro Bono
Service; the District of Columbia Circuit Judicial Conference Standing; the Committee
on Pro Bono Legal Services, Forty at Fifty recognition; the First Judicial District’s Pro
Bono Roll of Honor; recognition by the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and Council
Service of Philadelphia for representation of abused spouses under the Violence Against
Women Act; the Lawyers Clearinghouse Pro Bono Award; recognition by the Lawyers’
Committee for Civil Rights Under Law for contributions to the 2008 Election Protection
program; the Legal Intelligencer and Volunteers for the Indigent Program’s Unsung Hero
Award; the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty's Pro Bono Counsel
Award; the National Legal Aid & Defender Association's 2011 Beacon of Justice Award;
the New York City Family Court Volunteer Attorney program’s Pro Bono Service
Award; the New York City Pro Bono Center’s Outstanding Volunteer of the Month; the
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-5 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 7
3
New York Legal Aid Society’s Pro Bono Publico Award; the Philadelphia Volunteers for
the Indigent Program’s Chancellor Award and Volunteer of the Month; the Political
Asylum/Immigration Representation Project’s Pro Bono Attorney of the Year; the State
Bar of California’s Wiley W. Manuel Certificate for Pro Bono Legal Services Award;
and the Washington Lawyers’ Committee’s Outstanding Achievement Award.
4. I began working at Dechert in 1995. I have handled a variety of complex
commercial litigation matters, both trial and appellate, throughout the United States. I
have served several terms on the firm’s Policy Committee, and as a Deputy Chair of the
firm. I am also a former co-chair of the Mass Torts and Product Liability Group. During
that time, Dechert’s Product Liability and Mass Torts practice was honored for three
consecutive years with the Award for Excellence in Product Liability by Chambers USA,
a referral guide to leading lawyers in the United States.
5. I have been repeatedly recognized for my practice at Dechert. From 2007
to 2012, I was selected among the top product liability litigators both in New Jersey and
nationwide by Chambers. I have also been selected among “The Best Lawyers in
America” for commercial litigation, mass tort litigation, and product liability litigation by
U.S. News and Best Lawyers. From 2007 to 2012, I was also highlighted in The Legal
500 (U.S.) in the fields of Consumer Products and Pharmaceutical Products Liability
Litigation Defense. I was named a “litigation star” for six consecutive years beginning in
2008 by Benchmark Litigation, and was recently named a “Life Science Star” in the
inaugural edition of LMG Life Sciences 2012. In 2011, I received the American Jewish
Committee Judge Learned Hand Award, which is given annually to an outstanding leader
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-5 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 7
4
in the legal profession who exemplifies the “high principles and noble tradition
associated” with Judge Hand.
6. I have also been very active in pro bono representations and civil rights
matters. I am currently representing a group of defendant-intervenors in Texas v. Holder,
--- F. Supp. 2d ---, No. 12-128, 2012 WL 3743676 (D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2012), in which a
three-judge federal district court blocked Texas’s recent attempt to implement a
government-issued photo identification measure. This case was recently appealed to the
United States Supreme Court. I note that LDF attorneys are participating in that litigation
as well, representing a different set of intervenors. Based on my experience in Texas v.
Holder, I know that voting rights litigation can be particularly challenging and very
complex.
7. I have worked on a number of other pro bono matters in recent years.
Together with two other public interest law groups, I am also representing a group of
African-American parents in a school desegregation case pending in the Eastern District
of North Carolina. I recently completed litigation against the Passaic County Jail,
resulting in a comprehensive settlement to improve jail conditions.
8. Prior to joining Dechert, I served as Assistant Deputy Public Defender and
Counsel to the Public Advocate of New Jersey from 1975 to 1978; as a senior trial
attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) from 1979 to 1982, where I litigated
matters a diverse range of matters, including one-House veto cases and Fifth Amendment
takings cases arising out of the Bikini Atoll nuclear testing, and earned the DOJ Award
for Meritorious Service; and (from 1982 to 1995) as an associate and then partner at a
small Trenton, NJ, firm, Katzenbach, Gildea & Rudner, which then merged into a
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-5 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 7
5
medium sized Philadelphia firm, Fox Rothschild O’Brien & Frankel, where I was a
partner.
9. I am a past president of the Mercer County Bar Foundation and Mercer
County Bar Association, and a former member of the New Jersey Supreme Court
Committee on Civil Jury Charges, the New Jersey Supreme Court Bench Bar Media
Committee, and the New Jersey State Bar Association’s Special Task Force on
Disciplinary Reforms. I am also a former trustee of the Association of the Federal Bar of
the State of New Jersey.
10. I received my J.D., cum laude, in 1974 from New York University School
of Law in 1974, where I received Founders Day Award, Order of the Coif, and the
American Jurisprudence Award in Constitutional Law. I received my B.A. in 1971, cum
laude from the University of Pennsylvania.
11. I am familiar with LDF and its well-established history of advancing racial
justice. I have high regard for LDF attorneys’ professionalism, skills, and abilities.
Through the Texas v. Holder litigation, I have worked directly with the three LDF
attorneys who worked on this case – Mr. Haygood, Mr. Ho, and Ms. Korgaonkar. They
each bring an impressive degree of competence, knowledge, skill, and expertise to their
practice.
12. Having served as one of the Deputy Chairs of the firm from 2008 through
2011, and as co-chair of its Mass Torts/Product Liability Practice Group from 2006
through 2011, and through the course of my practice, I am familiar with market
information, publicly available, as to billing rates charged by law firms around the
country. I have continued to follow national billing rates, including those charged by
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-5 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 7
6
firms in New York City, since then through national legal periodicals and other publicly
available information.
13. I understand that the following table reflects the current hourly rates being
sought by LDF attorneys who participated in the above-captioned matter, Scott v.
Schedler:
Name Position Year of Graduation
Rate
Ryan Haygood Director, Political Participation Group
2001 $600
Dale Ho Assistant Counsel 2005 $475
Natasha Korgaonkar Assistant Counsel 2007 $350
LaTanya Harry Paralegal 2007 $175
Joseph Puma Paralegal N/A $175
Dhiren Patel Paralegal N/A $175
14. Based upon my knowledge and experience, the hourly rates for LDF time
keepers (both lawyers and paralegals) are well within the range of reasonable rates
charged by lawyers and paraprofessionals dealing with complex civil matters around the
country. Considering the particular and extensive experience of the timekeepers in the
area of civil rights, and that their primary location is in New York City, their hourly rates
may be considered well below those that would be charged by similarly experienced
timekeepers in national firms situated in New York City.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-5 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 7
7
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to
the best of my knowledge.
Executed on: February 22, 2013 /s/ Ezra D. Rosenberg
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-5 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 7
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR. and the
LOUISIANA STATE CONFERENCE OF
THE NAACP,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TOM SCHEDLER in his official capacity
as the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY
SONNIER, in her official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Children & Family Services, and BRUCE
D. GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity
as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Health & Hospitals,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-
JCW
ATTORNEY DECLARATION OF DALE E. HO IN SUPPORT OF
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Dale E. Ho, an attorney admitted to practice pro hac vice before this Court,
declares under penalty of perjury:
1. I am Assistant Counsel in the Political Participation Group of the NAACP
Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (“LDF”). LDF represents the plaintiffs in the
above-captioned action, along with Project Vote; Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver &
Jacobson LLP (“Fried Frank”); and attorney Ronald Wilson.
2. I respectfully submit this declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ application
for an award of their attorneys’ fees and costs (the “Fee Application”), pursuant to this
Court’s Order awarding fees, dated January 22, 2013. Doc. No. 436.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 17
2
3. This declaration is based on my personal knowledge, my consultation with
colleagues at LDF, Project Vote, Fried Frank, and Ronald Wilson, and a review of
documents related to this action.
FACTS RELEVANT TO THE FEE APPLICATION
4. Plaintiffs filed this civil rights action against Defendants on April 19,
2011, against a backdrop of many years of non-compliance with the National Voter
Registration Act (“NVRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg, et seq. Plaintiffs sought declaratory
and injunctive relief, including a permanent injunction requiring Defendants, their agents
and successors in office, and all persons working in concert with them, to implement
practices and procedures in compliance with Section 7 of the NVRA, 42 U.S.C. §
1973gg-5.
5. Counsel for the Plaintiffs—LDF, Project Vote, Ronald Wilson, and Fried
Frank—have longstanding expertise in civil rights litigation, including, inter alia, in the
areas of voting rights and election law, as well as a long history of working with and on
behalf of low-income and working class individuals and families and communities of
color.
6. Before even filing the case, Plaintiffs’ counsel conducted extensive factual
and legal research, including in-person investigations into Defendants’ non-compliance
with the NVRA, and attending meetings of local branches of the Louisiana State
Conference of the NAACP to discuss Defendants’ practices. Plaintiffs’ counsel also had
discussions with counsel in similar litigation efforts and strategized to develop the facts
and legal theories.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 17
3
7. Before filing, Plaintiffs also attempted to resolve the issues without
litigation by serving all Defendants with a notice letter in January 2011, advising
Defendants of their non-compliance with federal law, and requesting a meeting with
Defendants. These efforts were unsuccessful, as Defendants failed to provide any
meaningful response to Plaintiffs’ request for a meeting at that time, thus leading to this
protracted litigation.
8. The Complaint was filed on April 19, 2011. After the Complaint was
filed, Defendants eventually provided a more detailed response to Plaintiffs’ notice letter,
but again did not respond to Plaintiffs’ initial request for a meeting. Plaintiffs repeatedly
attempted to engage in settlement conversations with the Defendants, particularly during
the early stages of litigation. Indeed, Plaintiffs sought to settle this case during the
summer of 2011, before discovery began in earnest. Although Defendants initially
participated in those discussions, Defendants ultimately rebuffed efforts at settlement,
cutting off settlement conversations in September 2011, indicating that they would not
agree to any settlement in which this Court retained jurisdiction over this matter (such
relief was ultimately ordered). At this point, Plaintiffs would have settled this matter for
little or even no attorneys’ fees. Plaintiffs’ counsel had not yet expended significant
resources in the prosecution of this matter. I personally had expended fewer than 200
hours on this case, and very few other hours had been expended by LDF attorneys. As
explained below, I would ultimately spend over 1,400 hours working on this matter; other
LDF attorneys would collectively spend over 1,000 hours on this case, and LDF
paralegals would spend over 300 hours on this case.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 17
4
9. As required with a case of this magnitude, Plaintiffs counsel devoted
substantial resources to this case at the pre-trial stage. The discovery period lasted over
one year, and included extensive document and electronic discovery (including several
rounds of written discovery requests served by both sides), and several months of
depositions. Moreover, Plaintiffs’ counsel also engaged in discovery litigation, including
a successful motion to compel production of responsive documents and to obtain a
privilege log. Plaintiffs’ counsel also performed extensive legal research and analysis;
successfully opposed all three Defendants’ motions for partial summary; and successfully
cross-moved for partial summary judgment on a question of first impression in the
Eastern District of Louisiana. The ECF docket in this case contains over 400 entries.
10. After oral argument on partial summary judgment was conducted, this
Court ordered further settlement discussions, and Plaintiffs once again expressed their
willingness to settle this matter. Defendants, however, refused to engage in meaningful
settlement conversations, and once again reiterated their refusal to even consider any
settlement involving continuing jurisdiction by this Court—a form of relief, which, as
noted, was ultimately awarded.
11. Trial took place over three days, from October 15-17, 2012, and involved
the testimony of 16 witnesses and the introduction of over 90 exhibits. On January 22,
2013 this Court rendered its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, finding that all
three defendants had violated the voter registration obligations under Section 7 of the
NVRA in numerous different respects. See Doc. 436 at 20 (DHH); 25-26 (DCFS); and
28 (SOS). This Court entered judgment for Plaintiffs and awarded Plaintiffs reasonable
attorneys fees, litigation expenses, and costs.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 17
5
12. This case has already had a substantial impact on the ability of Louisiana’s
most vulnerable citizens to register to vote, and thus exercise the most precious right in
our democracy. After this Complaint was filed in April 2011, the number of voter
registrations through public assistance offices increased seven-fold (when comparing the
third quarter of 2011 to the third quarter during the previous two years). See Pls.’ Trial
Exs. 54-55; Pls.’ PFOF at 9, ¶ 29. Notably, this figure does not even include voter
registration forms submitted by public assistance clients through remote transactions
(mail, telephone, or internet). Prior to this case, Defendants refused to provide voter
registration services through such means, even though the vast majority of public
assistance benefits transactions are conducted remotely; this unlawful omission translated
into hundreds of thousands of Louisiana citizens’ being denied an opportunity to register
to vote. See Amended Pre-Trial Order, Uncontested Facts 10-29. Furthermore,
Defendants have also been ordered to cure numerous other violations of the statute,
which will further ensure that Louisiana citizens are offered an opportunity to register to
vote in accordance with federal law. Finally, the impact of this case will be felt
nationwide, as this Court’s rulings interpreting the scope of the NVRA and the
requirements it places on state agencies will likely be influential in other district courts
throughout the country.
PLAINTIFFS’ ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
A. Background on LDF
13. LDF is America’s premier legal organization fighting for racial justice,
and has, for more than seven decades, assisted African Americans and other people of
color in securing their civil and constitutional rights. Through litigation, advocacy, and
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 17
6
public education, LDF seeks structural changes to expand democracy, eliminate
disparities, and achieve racial justice in a society that fulfills the promise of equality for
all Americans.
14. For this reason, LDF has served as counsel in voting rights cases before
courts around the country, including, among others, two recent cases in the U.S. Supreme
Court: Shelby County v. Holder, No. 12-96 (currently pending before the United States
Supreme Court); and Northwest Austin Mun. Utility Dist. No. 1 v. Holder, 557 U.S. 193
(2009). In addition to this case, LDF also litigated a number of other voting rights cases
in U.S. District Courts during the same period that it was litigating this case, including
Texas v. Holder, --- F. Supp. 2d ---, No. 12-128, 2012 WL 3743676 (D.D.C. Aug. 30,
2012); Florida v. United States, --- F. Supp. 2d ---, No. 11-1428, 2012 WL 3538298
(D.D.C. Aug. 16, 2012); South Carolina v. United States, --- F. Supp. 2d ---, No. 12-
203, 2012 WL 4814094 (D.D.C. Oct. 10, 2012). LDF has also participated as amicus in
a number of voting rights and election law cases before the U.S. Supreme Court,
including, among others, Arizona v. Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., No. 12-71
(currently pending); Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1, 10 (2009); League of United Latin
Am. Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006); Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899 (1996); Miller
v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900 (1995); and Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986).
15. Despite this busy docket, LDF committed time and resources to this case
because of the important issue it raises—namely, ensuring that Louisiana’s most
vulnerable citizens are provided an opportunity to exercise the most fundamental right in
our democracy, in accordance with federal law.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 17
7
16. Because of the large and complex nature of this case and the need for
significant resources, LDF, Project Vote, Ronald Wilson, and, for purposes of trial, Fried
Frank, partnered together to prosecute the case. The three firms and Mr. Wilson are co-
counsel for Plaintiffs.
17. LDF has been involved in all aspects of the litigation. The legal work
performed by LDF includes: substantial pre-complaint investigation; communicating with
the named Plaintiffs; drafting the Complaint; substantial document and deposition
discovery; discovery-related litigation; taking and defending depositions; attempts to
negotiate settlement; successfully opposing Defendants’ motions for partial summary
judgment; moving for and conducting oral argument on Plaintiffs’ cross-motion for
summary judgment; and conducting trial.
18. At all times, LDF attorneys have conducted their representation of
Plaintiffs as efficiently and economically as possible within the bounds of our duty to
pursue our clients’ claims zealously.
B. Summary of Fees and Costs
19. Plaintiffs seek a total award of $1,049,829.80 for LDF’s attorneys’ fees
and $60,939.44 for LDF’s costs. Detailed, contemporaneous records are attached as
Exhibit A.
20. With assistance from other LDF attorneys, I have reviewed the time
descriptions for each LDF attorney and staff in this litigation. We have also coordinated
with our co-counsel to divide work and avoid duplication. We have exercised billing
judgment in a number of ways to ensure that the fees requested are reasonable:
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 17
8
a. First, although LDF began investigating Defendants’ unlawful actions in
2008, Plaintiffs do not seek any an award for fees for the extensive time
that LDF attorneys spent in the pre-suit investigations. Plaintiffs are only
seeking fees for work beginning in 2011, which includes some activities
prior to the filing of the Complaint, such as drafting litigation documents
and legal research, but excludes all time spent on investigating Plaintiffs’
claims.
b. Second, Plaintiffs do not seek an award for any fees for four LDF
supervising attorneys who worked on this case—Melissa Bruijneel
(Managing Attorney), Kristen Clarke (former Co-Director of LDF’s
Political Participation Group), Elise Boddie (Acting Director of
Litigation), Debo Adegbile (Director of Litigation, and Acting President
and Director-Counsel of LDF). Ms. Clarke, Ms. Boddie, and Mr.
Adegbile collectively performed dozens of hours of work in connection
with this matter, supervising other LDF attorneys and editing court filings.
In particular, Ms. Bruijneel, LDF’s Managing Attorney, performed several
hundred hours of work, including: performing substantive revisions and
cite-checking of Plaintiffs’ filings; ensuring conformity of those filings
with all applicable rules; and supervising LDF’s support staff and
paralegals who worked on this case.
c. Third, Plaintiffs do not seek an award for fees for time spent by LDF or
our co-counsel in connection with this fee petition.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 17
9
d. Fourth, for all travel time from New York to Louisiana, LDF is billing
only half its rate sought in this matter.
e. Fifth, with respect to depositions or court appearances (other than trial,
where all attorneys present played an active role in proceedings), when
more than two LDF attorneys were present, Plaintiffs do not seek an
award for fees for the work of any additional LDF attorneys who
participated in such proceedings, notwithstanding the active role any such
attorneys may have played. Any such time has been excluded from the
attached billing records.
f. Sixth, Plaintiffs do not seek an award for fees for time spent by LDF or
our co-counsel in connection with the defense of any re-depositions of
witnesses arising from Defendant Schedler’s motion to compel re-
depositions.
g. Seventh, as an exercise of billing judgment and to account for a
duplicative or repetitive work performed in conjunction with this case,
Plaintiffs have reduced the total fees they seek for work performed by
LDF (and other co-counsel) by 10 percent, as indicated in the table below.
C. Attorney Rates
21. Plaintiffs have provided contemporaneous time records for six individuals,
including three attorneys (Dale Ho, Natasha Korgaonkar, and Ryan Haygood) and three
paralegals (LaTanya Harry, Joseph Puma, Dhiren Patel), which are attached as Exhibit A
to this Declaration. Each entry consists of a description of the type of work done and the
amount of time spent by each attorney or staff member on the task.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 17
10
22. I have reviewed LDF’s time descriptions submitted in conjunction with this
fee petition and based on my experience and expertise litigating civil rights class actions and
other complex civil litigation, I believe that the time for which LDF seeks compensation was
necessary and essential to properly litigate this case and obtain favorable results for Plaintiffs.
23. The summary chart below sets forth the following for each LDF employee
for whom Plaintiffs seek compensation on this motion: the attorney’s or paralegal’s
position at LDF; his or her year of law school graduation (if applicable); the number of
hours for which compensation is sought; and the hourly rate requested.
Name Position Year of
Graduation
Hours Rate Total
Ryan
Haygood
Director,
Political
Participation
Group
2001 185
$600 $110,000.00
Dale Ho Assistant
Counsel
2005 1,414.3 $475 $671,792.50
Natasha
Korgaonkar
Assistant
Counsel
2007 922.3 $350 $322,805.00
LaTanya
Harry
Paralegal 2007 62.1 $175 $10,867.50
Joseph Puma Paralegal N/A 260 $175 $45,500.00
Dhiren Patel Paralegal N/A 31.5 $175 $5,512.50
Subtotal $1,166,477.50
Minus 10% - $116,647.75
TOTAL $1,049,829.80
24. LDF is a non-profit civil rights law firm that does not typically bill its
clients. But, for the purposes of civil rights litigation, its relevant hourly rates for
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 17
11
comparison purposes are those of a law firm with a national litigation practice and
substantial expertise in civil rights law, as well as significant skill and experience in
appellate advocacy. The billing rates that Plaintiffs seek for LDF attorneys and staff, like
the rates of most other law firms and legal organizations, vary with the experience,
position, and responsibilities of the individual involved.
25. LDF has reviewed these hourly rates to ensure that they are within the
range of reasonableness for attorneys with comparable backgrounds, expertise,
experience, reputation, and positions of national prominence litigating civil rights class
actions and other complex litigation in Washington, DC and New York City, where
LDF’s offices are located, as well as nationwide.
26. I am generally familiar with the range of current hourly rates charged by
attorneys nationwide in large firms that have litigation practices that matters of
significant complexity at the trial, appellate, and Supreme Court level. I am aware of
those rates because they are published in court opinions, the legal press, and surveys.
27. All of the attorneys and staff who contributed to this case work out of
LDF’s New York City office. In my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, LDF’s
hourly rates are within the range of reasonableness and current market rates in New York
City for hourly paid litigation by attorneys of comparable ability, skills, and reputation in
civil rights and other complex litigation in federal trial courts.
28. This assessment is independently confirmed by the accompanying
declarations from other practitioners. Furthermore, as set forth in the declaration of my
co-counsel Michael de Leeuw, I understand that, had Mr. Haygood and I remained
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 17
12
attorneys at Fried Frank, the firm would currently bill over $700 per hour for my work,
and over $800 per hour for Mr. Haygood’s.
29. Below, I summarize the experience, qualifications, and work performed by
each.
30. I have been Assistant Counsel in LDF’s Political Participation Group since
2009. In that capacity, I have represented individual citizens and organizations in New
York, Louisiana, Florida, Alabama, and Texas in state or federal proceedings, including
trials and oral arguments on dispositive motions. Recently, I successfully represented
intervenors in two voting rights cases; Florida v. United States, --- F. Supp. 2d ---, No.
11-1428, 2012 WL 3538298 (D.D.C. Aug. 16, 2012), in which a three-judge federal
court rejected Florida’s attempt to drastically reduce the early voting period; and Little v.
LATFOR (NY Supreme Court), in which the New York Supreme Court, Albany County
Court sustained changes to the method of counting incarcerated individuals during New
York State’s legislative redistricting process. I am currently a member of LDF’s
litigation team representing respondent-intervenors in Shelby County v. Holder, No. 12-
96, a case pending before the United States Supreme Court, concerning the
constitutionality of Section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965. I have practiced
extensively before the Supreme Court, authoring or contributing to amicus briefs in
McDonald v. Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010) (cited in majority op., 130 S. Ct. at 3030
n.6); Bartlett v. Strickland, supra (cited in dissenting op. of Breyer, J., 556 U.S. at 45);
Graham v. Florida, 130 S.Ct. 2011 (2010); and District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S.
570 (2008). I also currently serve as an Adjunct Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law
School, where I teach a course on Election Law. From 2007 to 2009, I was an associate
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 17
13
and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund Fellow in the New York office of Fried Frank,
where I litigated complex commercial and civil rights matters. From 2005 to 2007, I was
a law clerk, first to Judge Barbara S. Jones of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, and then to Judge Robert S. Smith of the New York
Court of Appeals (the State of New York’s highest court). I received a J.D. from Yale
Law School in 2005, where I was an editor of the Yale International Law Journal and a
director of the Immigration Legal Services Clinic. I received an A.B. from Princeton
University in 1999. Plaintiffs seek $475 per hour for my work on this litigation.
31. As lead attorney for LDF in this action, I have been actively involved in
developing and litigating the case from pre-suit investigations beginning in 2010, over
one year before the Complaint was filed in April 2011. Among other things, I drafted our
written discovery requests; compiled our written discovery responses; collected
documents from our clients and coordinated their production during discovery; conducted
LDF’s review of discovery documents produced by Defendants; conducted settlement
negotiations with Defendants; drafted our dispositive motions and numerous other filings;
took several depositions; conducted oral argument on cross-motions for partial summary
judgment; and served as lead counsel at trial.
32. Ryan Haygood is the Director of the of LDF’s Political Participation
Group. In that capacity, he represents African Americans and other people of color in a
variety of actions involving voting discrimination, including challenges to voting
measures under Sections 2 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the United States Constitution,
and state laws. Mr. Haygood has practiced before the United States Supreme Court, as a
member of LDF’s litigation team in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. One
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 13 of 17
14
v. Holder, 557 U.S. 193 (2009); and is currently a member of LDF’s litigation team in
Shelby County v. Holder, No. 12-96. Last year, Mr. Haygood successfully represented
voters in three cases in federal district court: Florida v. United States, --- F. Supp. 2d ---
, No. 11-1428, 2012 WL 3538298 (D.D.C. Aug. 16, 2012); Texas v. Holder, --- F.
Supp. 2d ---, No. 12-128, 2012 WL 3743676 (D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2012), in which a three-
judge federal court blocked Texas’s recent attempt to implement a government-issued
photo identification measure; and South Carolina v. United States, --- F. Supp. 2d ---,
No. 12-203, 2012 WL 4814094 (D.D.C. Oct. 10, 2012), in which a three-judge federal
court rejected South Carolina’s request to implement its photo identification law for the
2012 Presidential election. Mr. Haygood’s other voting rights cases include or have
included: Farrakhan v. Gregoire, 623 F. 3d 990 (9th Cir. 2010), a challenge to
Washington State’s felon disfranchisement law; Williams v. McKeithen, (E.D. La.), a
challenge to Jefferson Parish’s at-large method of electing judges to the state court of
appeals; and Ga. State Conference of the NAACP v. Fayette County Bd. of
Commissioners, (N.D. Ga.), a pending challenge to the County’s at-large method of
electing members to its Board of Commissioners and Board of Education. Prior to
joining LDF in 2003, Mr. Haygood was an associate and the NAACP Legal Defense
Fund Fellow at Fried Frank from 2001 to 2003, where he represented clients in a variety
of complex commercial and civil rights matters before federal courts. Mr. Haygood
received his J.D. from the University of Colorado School of Law in 2001, and a B.A. in
American History and Political Science cum laude from Colorado College, in 1997.
Plaintiffs seek $600 per hour for Mr. Haygood’s work on this litigation.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 14 of 17
15
33. Mr. Haygood has worked on this case since its inception, including
supervising numerous depositions; reviewing and revising all filings in the case; and
directing litigation strategy.
34. Natasha M. Korgaonkar has been Assistant Counsel in LDF’s Political
Participation Group since 2011. She is, inter alia, a member of LDF’s litigation team in
Shelby County v. Holder, No. 12-96 (U.S. Supreme Court) and in Texas v. Holder, --- F.
Supp. 2d ---, No. 12-128, 2012 WL 3743676 (D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2012). From 2008 to
2011, she worked for the law firm of Covington & Burling LLP where she was a
litigation associate working on a number of complex commercial cases and white collar
investigations. From 2007 to 2008, she worked at the Corporation for Civil Action and
Education, a non-profit organization in San Juan, Puerto Rico that provides direct legal
services to prisoners. See Morales Feliciano v. Garcia Padilla, 3:79-cv-0004-pjb (D.
P.R.). Ms. Korgaonkar received her undergraduate degree in 2002 from Brown
University, and her Masters Degree in African American history in 2004 from Columbia
University. She earned her law degree in 2007 from Columbia University, where she was
a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar and Chapter Editor of the Jailhouse Lawyers Manual (a
publication of the Columbia Human Rights Law Review). Plaintiffs seek $350 per hour
for Ms. Korgaonkar’s work on this litigation.
35. Ms. Korgaonkar began working on the case in May 2011. Ms.
Korgaonkar participated in our review of discovery documents; deposed at least five
witnesses; defended depositions of our clients; drafted and revised filings, including our
motion for summary judgment; drafted motions in limine and responses to motions in
limine; engaged in significant trial preparation; and questioned several witnesses at trial.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 15 of 17
16
36. LaTanya Harry is a paralegal at LDF. She graduated from Dartmouth
College in 2001. In 2007, she received a J.D. from Rutgers-Newark School of Law, and
a Masters Degree in City and Regional Planning (Urban Planning) from the Edward J.
Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University. Ms. Harry has
worked as a paralegal at LDF since August 2011. Joseph Puma was a paralegal at LDF
until 2012. Mr. Puma graduated from Yale University in 2003, and was a paralegal at
LDF from 2011 to 2012, when he left to enroll as a divinity student at Union Theological
Seminary in New York. Dhiren Patel replaced Mr. Puma as a paralegal at LDF in August
2012. Mr. Patel graduated from Seton Hall University in 2010, and has been working as
a paralegal for over two years. Ms. Harry, Mr. Puma, and Mr. Patel performed a number
of tasks in connection with this litigation, including: processing, organizing, and filing
discovery documents received from Defendants; proceeding Plaintiffs’ documents for
production in discovery; preparing exhibits for depositions; cite-checking, blue-booking,
and formatting briefs and other filings; and other case management functions. Plaintiffs
seek $175 per hour for Ms. Harry’s, Mr. Puma’s, and Mr. Patel’s work on this litigation.
C. Costs and Expenses
37. Plaintiffs seek compensation for costs expended by LDF in connection
with this litigation. These costs and expenses are set forth in a spreadsheet, with a brief
description of each item, attached as Exhibit B. Plaintiffs do not seek compensation for
costs associated with: (i) pre-suit investigations from 2008 through 2010; (ii) expenses
associated with meals while traveling for depositions or other court appearances; (iii)
ordinary Westlaw research; (iv) office supplies and all in-house printing related to this
case; and (v) certain travel expenses such as parking and tolls..
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 16 of 17
17
CONCLUSION
38. For the reasons set forth above and in Plaintiffs’ supporting memorandum
of law, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court award them attorneys’ fees in the
amount of $1,049,829.80 for LDF’s work in connection with this matter, and $60,939.44
for LDF’s costs and expenses, in addition to the amounts sought by co-counsel.
Executed: New York, NY
February 25, 2013
/s/
Dale Ho
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-6 Filed 02/26/13 Page 17 of 17
DALE HO TIME RECORDSTOTAL: 1414.3
2011 2012January: 7 January: 114.6February 7.5 February 72.1March: 12.8 March: 56.7April: 35.2 April: 72.4May: 24.5 May: 47.1June: 90.9 June: 25.5July: 60.7 July: 27August 11.1 August 159.1September 20.3 September 155.1October 41.4 October 176.5November 112.3 November 31.6December 52.9 December 0
TOTAL: 476.6 TOTAL: 937.7
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 1
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 51
RYAN HAYGOOD TIME RECORDSTOTAL: 167.5
2011 2012January: 1.5 January: 2.6February 1.7 February 0.3March: 2.7 March: 3April: 6.9 April: 6.7May: 4 May: 3.4June: 5.4 June: 17.5July: 6.1 July: 0August 1.9 August 0September 2 September 6.4October 4 October 34.9November 27.6 November 1.7December 27.2 December 0
TOTAL: 91 TOTAL: 76.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 51
Jan-11 Running Total: 1.5
Date Total Summary
7-Jan 1.5 review and revise notice letter
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 51
Feb-11 Running Total: 1.7
Date Total Summary2/9/2013 0.5 strategy meeting with team
22-Feb 1.2 reviewed SOS response letter
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 51
Mar-11 Running Total: 2.7
Date Total Summary
28-Mar 2.7 reviewed and edited complaint
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 5
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 51
Apr-11 Running Total: 6.9
Date Total Summary
9-Apr 2.9 reviewed and edited complaint
19-Apr 2.9revised complaint (.9); reviewed and revised draftdiscovery requests (2)
25-Apr 0.4 meeting to discuss discovery strategy26-Apr 0.7 meeting to discuss discovery strategy
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 51
May-11 Running Total: 4
Date Total Summary
5-May 0.8 meeting to discuss discovery strategy6-May 1.1 reviewed and revised discovery requests
17-May 2.1 reviewed and revised draft opposition brief
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 7
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 51
Jun-11 Running Total: 5.4
Date Total Summary
2-Jun 0.8 review 26(f) submission24-Jun 3.2 review and revise opp to motion to dismiss
30-Jun 1.4review draft settlement offer (.8); reviewdefendants' continuance motion (.6)
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 8
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 51
Jul-11 Running Total: 6.1
Date Total Summary
2-Jul 1.2 review and revise opposition to motion to dismiss
3-Jul 1.5review draft responses to defendants' objections todiscovery requests (1.5)
6-Jul 2.3preparation for moot argument (1.2); mootarguments for motion to dismiss (1)
21-Jul 1.1 review settlement proposal
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 9
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 51
Aug-11 Running Total: 1.9
Date Total Summary
26-Aug 0.1 post settlement call strategy discussion30-Aug 1.8 review defendants' documents
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 51
Sep-11 Running Total: 2
Date Total Summary
14-Sep 0.8 review and revise discovery requests28-Sep 1.2 review and revise discovery requests
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 11
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 51
Oct-11 Running Total: 4
Date Total Summary
14-Oct 2.8 review draft depo outlines18-Oct 1.2 review and revise responses to interrogatories
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 51
Nov-11 Running Total: 27.6
Date Total Summary
6-Nov 2.4 review and revise deposition outlines9-Nov 2.2 review and revise deposition outlines
14-Nov 6.0 travel (8 hrs @ half-time); review depo outlines (2)
15-Nov 7.0 depositions16-Nov 0.0 depositions ((7 hours of time written off to avoid duplication)17-Nov 6.0 depositions18-Nov 4.0 travel (8 hrs @ half-time)
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 13
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 13 of 51
Dec-11 Running Total: 27.2
Date Total Summary
15-Dec 3.2review and revise deposition outlines (2.3); discussionwith team regarding depositions (0.9)
18-Dec 4.0 travel to Baton Rouge (8 hrs @half)19-Dec 8.0 depositions and deposition preparation20-Dec 8.0 depositions and deposition preparation21-Dec 4.0 travel from Baton Rouge (8 hrs @half)
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 14
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 14 of 51
Jan-12 Running Total: 2.6
Date Total Summary1/24/2013 0.8 preparation for deposition
30-Jan 1.8 read and revise motion to compel
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 15
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 15 of 51
Feb-12 Running Total: 0.3
Date Total Summary7-Feb 0.3 review defendants' opposition to motion to compel
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 16
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 16 of 51
Mar-12 Running Total: 3
Date Total Summary
2-Mar 0.4 review opposition to motion to strike7-Mar 0.5 meeting to discuss PSJ Reply
10-Mar 2.1 review and revise PSJ Reply
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 17
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 17 of 51
Apr-12 Running Total: 6.7
Date Total Summary
3-Apr 0.9 review and revise opposition to motion to strike
10-Apr 3.5PSJ oral argument moot (2); review of PSJ papers inpreparation for moot (1.5)
17-Apr 2.1PSJ moot argument (1); review PSJ papers inpreparation for moot (1.1)
20-Apr 0.2 call with team regarding oral argument
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 18
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 18 of 51
May-12 Running Total: 3.4
Date Total Summary
1-May 0.1 review settlement proposal from DHH2-May 0.1 review settlement proposal from SOS
3-May 0.7review district court opinion (0.2); revise press release(0.5)
8-May 0.5 Prepare for settlement conference15-May 1 strategy call w/ co-counsel18-May 1 strategy call w/ co-counsel
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 19
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 19 of 51
Jun-12 Jun-12 17.5
Date Total Summary
1-Jun 0.7 call with co-counsel regarding depositions
2-Jun 1.6Call with co-counsel regarding depositions and motions (0.5);preparation for defending depositions (1.1)
4-Jun 0.9call with co-counsel (0.5); discussion regarding depositiondefense (.4)
5-Jun 1.2 call with co-counsel regarding depositions10-Jun 1.1 review and revision of scheduling motion (1.1)14-Jun 0.4 review and revision of motion to expedite
20-Jun 1.5review and revision of Ps' responses to rogs (.7); review andrevision of Ps' responses to RFAs (.7)
26-Jun 3.8review and revisions to MSJ (2.6); meeting with co-counselregarding MSJ (1.2)
27-Jun 2.9 review and revision of MSJ and ancillary documents28-Jun 1.9 review and revision of MSJ and ancillary documents30-Jun 1.5 review and revision of MSJ and ancillary documents
TOTAL 17.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 20 of 51
Jul-12 Running Total: 24.5
Date Total Summary
2-Jul 1.9 review and revise Statement of Facts3-Jul 4.1 revise, finalize and file MSJ
5-Jul 1.9revising and finalizing opposition to SOSmotion for extension.
9-Jul 1.8review and revise opposition to motion tocompel
10-Jul 1.1 review and revise motion to expedite
12-Jul 2.4
meeting with co-counsel (1.5); review andrevise reply in support of motion to quash(.9)
15-Jul 0.9discussion with co-counsel regardingNAACP documents
16-Jul 1.2Read motion for sanctions (0.3); reviewdraft extension of time (.9)
17-Jul 4.4
review and revise opposition tocompel/sanctions (2.9); call with counsel(1.5)
18-Jul 1.9
strategy call w/ co-counsel (.7); review andrevision of opposition to discoveryextension motion (1.2)
23-Jul 2.2
review opposition to motion for sanctions(.8); review and revise oppostion to motionto compel (.9); communication with co-counsel regarding production of documents(.5)
26-Jul 0.7 review draft MSJ reply (.7)
TOTAL 24.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 21
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 21 of 51
Aug-12
Date Total Summary
1-Aug 0.5 call with co-counsel3-Aug 0.2 review deadlines for pre-trial order
10-Aug 3.9 review and revise SJ reply brief (3.2); review motion to strike (.7)14-Aug 1.0 review defendants' SJ briefs15-Aug 1.2 review and revise MTS16-Aug 2.2 review Defendants' oppositions to MSJ22-Aug 1.3 Review, finalization and filing of motion to strike23-Aug 1.1 review draft pretrial order24-Aug 0.9 edits to SJ reply27-Aug 1.7 Moot oral argument (1); meeting regarding oral argument (0.7);29-Aug 3.0 preparation for moot oral argument (1); moot oral argument (2)
30-Aug 4.1 preparation for moot oral argument (1.1); moot oral argument (3)
TOTAL 21.1
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 22
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 22 of 51
Sep-12 Running Total: 6.4
Date Total Summary
3-Sep 2.9 prepare for moot oral argument (.9); moot oral argument21-Sep 3.5 review of pretrial order (2.1); review conclusions of law
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 23
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 23 of 51
Oct-12 Running Total: 34.9
Date Total Summary
13-Oct 2.9 reviewed witness outlines14-Oct 3.0 travel to New Orleans (6 hrs @ half-time)15-Oct 13.0 trial (9); trial prep (4)16-Oct 13.0 trial (9); trial prep (4)17-Oct 3.0 return travel from New Orleans (6 hrs @ half-time)
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 24
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 24 of 51
Nov-12 Running Total: 1.7
Date Total Summary
12-Nov 1.7 review of post-trial brief
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 25
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 25 of 51
Natasha Korgaonkar (Time Records) Running Total: 922.3
2011 2012
January: 0 January: 57.5February 0 February 5.8March: 0 March: 1.5April: 0 April: 30.9May: 12.7 May: 41.7June: 0 June: 93.1July: 1.5 July: 94August 0 August 142.3September 0 September 126.5October 0 October 187.6November 73.8 November 7.6December 45.8 December 0
TOTAL 2011: 133.8 TOTAL 2012: 788.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 26
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 26 of 51
May-11
Date Total Summary
2-May 1.6 Assist with responses to discovery requests
5-May 0.8meeting with supervisors to discuss discoverystrategy
6-May9-May 0.6 conference call with opposing counsel (0.6)
10-May
11-May 5.3Draft RFAs and RFPs for one defendant forDEH (5.3)
12-May13-May15-May16-May 1.3 offer edits to discovery requests (1.3)17-May 1.5 Draft deposition notices (1.5)
23-May 1.6revise discovery requests (1.2); call w/ co-counsel re: discovery scheule (0.4)
TOTAL 12.7
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 27
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 27 of 51
Jul-11
Date Total Summary
1-Jul
5-Jul6-Jul 1 moot arguments for motion to dismiss (1)7-Jul8-Jul
11-Jul12-Jul
13-Jul 0.5 meeting with DEH regarding motion to dismiss (0.5)14-Jul15-Jul19-Jul20-Jul25-Jul
TOTAL 1.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 28
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 28 of 51
Nov-11
Date Total Summary
1-Nov 5.5Meet with DEH regarding upcoming depositions (0.5); draft, revisedepo outlines (5)
2-Nov 6.1 Review document for depo outlines3-Nov 2.0 draft, revise depo outlines (2)4-Nov6-Nov7-Nov 3.1 Work on deposition outlines (3.1)8-Nov 8.0 depositions; draft, revise depo outlines (2)9-Nov
10-Nov 5.0Review documents for revised depo outlines, and revision of outlines(5)
11-Nov 6.0 review DHH docs, draft, revise depo outlines
12-Nov 5.0Review documents for revised depo outlines, and revision of outlines(5)
13-Nov 6.0Review documents for revised depo outlines, preparingexhibits/documents for travel, and revision of outlines (6)
14-Nov 10.0 travel (8 hrs @ half-time); draft, revise depo outlines (6)
15-Nov 2.0 revise depo outlines (2); depositions (7 hours of time written off)16-Nov 7.0 depositions (7)
17-Nov 6.1depositions (6); correspondence with counsel regarding documents(0.1)
19-Nov 1.0 travel (8 hrs @ half-time)21-Nov 0.022-Nov 0.023-Nov 0.028-Nov 1.0 call w/ co-counsel (1)
TOTAL 73.8
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 29
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 29 of 51
Dec-11
Date Total Summary
5-Dec6-Dec 3.4 call w/ co-counsel (1.1); review SOS production (2.3)
10-Dec12-Dec13-Dec
14-Dec 0.8discuss proposed stipulations for Crawford (SOS)deposition (0.8)
15-Dec 9.8Draft deposition outlines (4.2); discuss depositions withDEH and RPH (0.9)
16-Dec 7.7Review documents for depositions (2.1); revise depositionoutlines (5.6)
18-Dec 4.0 Travel to Baton Rouge (8 hrs @half)19-Dec 8.1 Depositions and deposition preparation (8.1)20-Dec 8.0 Depositions and deposition preparation (8)21-Dec 4.0 Travel from Baton Rouge (8 hrs @half)22-Dec23-Dec24-Dec26-Dec
TOTAL 45.8
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 30 of 51
Jan-12
Date Total Summary
9-Jan10-Jan11-Jan13-Jan17-Jan18-Jan19-Jan 4.1 Reseach for PSJ opposition (4.1)20-Jan
21-Jan 9.9Preparation for depositions (5.3); legal research formotion to compel (4.6)
23-Jan 6.7 Preparation for deposition (2.1); legal research for compel motion (4.6)24-Jan 4.3 Drafting motion to compel (4.3)
25-Jan 3.2 Incorporating edits from DEH in motion to appeals (3.2)
26-Jan27-Jan Preparing documents for upcoming trip to BR for depositions (2.3)28-Jan29-Jan 6 Travel (8 hrs @ half-time); prepare for depositions (2)
30-Jan 9.8depositions (7); prepare client for deposition (1.5);revise deposition transcript (1.3)
31-Jan 13.5depositions (5.4); revise and file motion to compel (4.1);return travel from Baton Rouge (8 hrs @ half-time)
TOTAL 57.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 31
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 31 of 51
Feb-12
Date Total Summary1-Feb2-Feb3-Feb
4-Feb 2.9research for PSJ Reply Brief (1.1); legal research for motionto compel reply (1.8)
7-Feb 2.6Correspondence regarding questions from DEH on motionto compel (2.6)
8-Feb 0.3 Conversation with DEH regarding motion to compel (0.3)9-Feb
10-Feb13-Feb14-Feb15-Feb16-Feb19-Feb20-Feb21-Feb22-Feb23-Feb24-Feb25-Feb27-Feb28-Feb29-Feb
TOTAL 5.8
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 32
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 32 of 51
Mar-12
Date Total Summary
1-Mar 02-Mar 03-Mar 04-Mar 05-Mar6-Mar 1.5 edits to draft PSJ reply motion (1.5)7-Mar 08-Mar9-Mar
10-Mar 011-Mar 012-Mar 013-Mar 014-Mar15-Mar 016-Mar 017-Mar 018-Mar 019-Mar 020-Mar 021-Mar22-Mar23-Mar 024-Mar 025-Mar 026-Mar27-Mar28-Mar29-Mar30-Mar31-Mar 0
TOTAL 1.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 33
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 33 of 51
Apr-12
Date Total Summary
1-Apr
2-Apr 3
Revise opp to mot to strike (1); reviseopp to discovery motion (1); revisesurreply (1)
3-Apr4-Apr5-Apr6-Apr7-Apr 08-Apr 09-Apr
10-Apr 2 PSJ oral argument moot (2)11-Apr 012-Apr 013-Apr 014-Apr 015-Apr 016-Apr 0
17-Apr 3.5moot argument (1.0); review of PSJpapers in anticipation of argument (2.5)
18-Apr 1.2Research questions in preparations fororal argument (1.2)
19-Apr 8 Travel to New Orleans (5)
20-Apr 2.2Court appearance (2); correspondencewith RPH regarding oral argument (0.2)
21-Apr 5 travel from New Orleans22-Apr 023-Apr 0.8 Conference call with co-counsel (0.8)25-Apr 0
26-Apr 3.4
Discuss client deposition (0.4); beginreview of documents for clientdeposition (2.5); call with client toprepare for deposition (0.5)
27-Apr 1.3
revise draft settlement agreement (0.4);review of past settlement documents(0.7); call w/ co-counsel re: settlement(0.2); discuss deposition with client (0.2)
30-Apr 0.5 client call (0.5)28-Apr 029-Apr 030-Apr
TOTAL 30.9
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 34
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 34 of 51
May-12
Date Total Summary
1-May 2.2review settlement proposal from DHH (0.1); depositionprep calls w clients (2.1)
2-May 1review settlement proposal from SOS (0.2); call with co-counsel to discuss meet-and-confer (0.8)
3-May 2.9
Prepare for meet and confer (0.5); meet and confer w/Defs (0.6); meeting with co-counsel to discuss (0.5); callwith client to discuss deposition (1.3)
4-May 4.6Review materials for deposition prep (3); prep client fordeposition (1.6)
8-May 2Prepare for settlement conference (0.5); prepare client fordeposition (1.5)
9-May 7
travel to New Orleans (6 hrs @ half-time); prepare forsettlement conference (1.0); settlement conference (1.0);prepare for deposition (2.0)
10-May 4.9 defend deposition (4.0); meet with client (0.9)12-May 6 return travel from New Orleans (6 hrs @ half-time)15-May 1 strategy call w/ co-counsel (1.0)18-May 1 strategy call w/ co-counsel (1.0)21-May 222-May 0.6 deposition preparation call (0.6)
23-May 0.4review correspondence with court and opposing counsel(0.4)
24-May 2.5edits to draft brief in opposition to certification for appeal(2.0); conference with court (0.5)
27-May 2.1 Review draft motion in opposition to certification
29-May 1Call with client regarding upcoming deposition preparation(1)
31-May 0.5 instructions on next steps for co-counsel
TOTAL 41.7
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 35
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 35 of 51
Jun-12
Date Total Summary
1-Jun 2.7
Call with co-counsel regardingdepositions/strategy (0.7); calls to clientsregarding depositions (2)
2-Jun 4.8
Call with co-counsel regardingdepositions/strategy, and upcomingmotions (0.5); drafting motion re: schedule(1.2); deposition defense preparation (3.1)
3-Jun
4-Jun 6.2
Call with co-counsel regarding schedulingmotion (0.5); work on scheduling motion(1.5); preparation of cross examinations fordepo defense (4.2)
5-Jun 11.8
Deposition prep with clients (3.6); work onscheduling motion (1); travel to NewOrleans (6 at half); consult with co-counselregarding depositions and strategy (1.2)
6-Jun 7.3Deposition prep with clients (1.3);defending depositions (6)
7-Jun 8.3
Defending depositions (3.7); depositionprep with clients (1.1); finalizing witness listfor filing (2); work on scheduling motion(1.5)
8-Jun9-Jun 2.4 Draft scheduling motion (2.4)
10-Jun 1.3 revise scheduling motion (1.3)
11-Jun 2.5draft correspondence to Defendants (0.5);revise scheduling motion (2)
12-Jun
13-Jun 2.2 Finalizing and filing scheduling motion (2.2)14-Jun 0.6 Revision of motion to expedite (0.6)15-Jun16-Jun17-Jun18-Jun
19-Jun 4.2Legal research on issues related to MSJ(4.2)
20-Jun 4.9
Drafting correspondence to counsel (0.5);drafting Ps' responses to DHH 2d Rogs(1.3); work on Ps' responses to DCFS 2dRFAs (3.1)
21-Jun 1.2 Preparation for conference with Court (1.2)
22-Jun 1.5Preparation for conference with Court (1);conference with Court (0.5)
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 36
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 36 of 51
23-Jun
24-Jun 3.8Work on drafting/editing MSJ (1.3); reviewof deposition transcripts (2.5)
25-Jun 5.1
Revisions to MSJ draft and draftingancillary documents (3); review ofdeposition transcripts (2.1)
26-Jun 4.7
Revisions to MSJ (3); meeting with co-counsel regarding MSJ andcorresponsence with opposing counsel(1.2); drafting ancillary documents,statement of facts, etc. for MSJ (2.3); callto client regarding treasurer deposition(0.2).
27-Jun 3.8
Editing MSJ and ancillary documents (3.1);correspondence with co-counsel regardingdepositions (0.7)
28-Jun 6.6
Editing MSJ and ancillary documents (6.1);meeting with colleague regarding standing(0.5)
29-Jun 4.9 Revisions to MSJ (4.9)
30-Jun 2.3 Editing MSJ and ancillary documents (2.3)
TOTAL 93.1
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 37
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 37 of 51
Jul-12 Running Total: 188
Date Total Summary
1-Jul 02-Jul 3.5 revise SOF3-Jul 9.2 Finalizing and filing MSJ
4-Jul 4.1Drafting opposition to SOS motion forextension
5-Jul 5.4Editing and finalizing for filing opposition toSOS motion for extension.
6-Jul 07-Jul 0
8-Jul 5.1Researching and drafting motion to quashsubpoena (5.1)
9-Jul 7.2Draft opposition to motion to compel (3.2);draft motion for reconsideration (4)
10-Jul 4.1Drafting and finalizing for filing motion toexpedite (4.1)
11-Jul 0
12-Jul 6.8
Drafting/revising reply in support of motionto quash (3.6); meeting with co-counsel(1.5); editing reply in support of motion toquash (1.7)
13-Jul 5.1Reading SOS motion to compel (0.5);research and drafting opposition (4.6)
14-Jul 0
15-Jul 4.1
Review of NAA documents (0.9);discussion with co-counsel regarding same(0.9); legal research related to issue forreply brief (2.3)
16-Jul 7.9
Reading motion for sanctions (0.4);research and drafting opposition andancillary documents (6.3); review draftextension of time (1.2)
17-Jul 7.2
Final review of opposition tocompel/sanctions (1); strategy call w/ co-counsel (1.5); drafting and finalizingopposition to motion to compel (4.7)
18-Jul 3.1
strategy call w/ co-counsel (.7); editingopposition to discovery extension motion(2.1)
19-Jul 6.6Review state conference documents (1.5);review all client deposition transcripts (5.1)
20-Jul 2.8Review and edit draft of opp to secondmotion to compel (2.8)
21-Jul 022-Jul 0
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 38
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 38 of 51
23-Jul 6.1
Review opp to motion for sanctions (1.3);read discovery order (0.4); review and editopp to motion to compel (1.8);communication with clients regardingdepositions (0.5); communication with co-counsel regarding production of documents(0.5); work on production of documents(1.2)
24-Jul 1.2
Review draft correspondence withopposing counsel regarding untimelydocument requests (0.9); communicationwith clients regarding depositions (0.3)
25-Jul26-Jul 2 Review draft MSJ reply (2)27-Jul 2.5 Review deposition transcripts (2.5)
TOTAL 94
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 39
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 39 of 51
Aug-12
Date Total Summary
1-Aug 1.0 Call with co-counsel (0.5); draft motion for sanctions (0.5)
2-Aug 5.1draft summary judgment Reply (1.0); revise motion for sanctions(0.5)
3-Aug 6.7
strategy call with co-counsel (0.9); draft letter to defendantsregarding newly-produced documents (0.6); reviewing deadlinesfor pre-trial order (0.2); review deposition transcripts for summaryjudgment reply (2); draft motion to strike newly produceddocuments (2.5); review newly produced documents fromdefendants (0.5)
6-Aug 5.1 Work on witness charts, review of deposition transcripts (5.1)7-Aug 4.0 Work on witness charts and exhibit lists for pre-trial order (4)
8-Aug 7.0draft MSJ Reply (5.5); co-counsel call re: pre-trial order and casestrategy (1.0); revise co-counsel agreement (0.5)
9-Aug 6.1 Draft motion to strike (6.1)10-Aug 4.0 Review draft SJ Reply brief (3); review motion to strike (1)
14-Aug 5.5Research and revise motion to strike (3.3); work on witness listsand trial exhibits (3.2)
15-Aug 10.5review Defendants' SJ briefs (1.5); edits to MTS (3.1);preparations for and drafting outline for MSJ argument (3.6)
16-Aug 9.4
review Defs' oppositions to MSJ (2.9); conference call with co-counsel to discuss Defs' MSJ Opposition briefs (1); research formotion to strike (2.9); work on portion of MSJ reply (2.6)
18-Aug 7.3client call (1); calls re: client issues (2); research for portion ofMSJ reply (2.3); draft portion of MSJ reply (2)
20-Aug 12.0meeting re: client issues (2.5); client call (0.5); clientcorrespondence (0.5); research for MSJ Reply (8.5)
21-Aug 8.4revise PTO (7); discuss client issues (0.5); revise MSJ Reply (1.3);review MTS (0.3); revise MTS (0.3)
22-Aug 5.3 Finalization and filing of motion to strike (5.3)23-Aug 5.2 review draft pretrial order (5.2)
24-Aug 6.9oral arg outline (3.5); correspondence w/ co-counsel (0.4); edits toSJ Reply (3)
25-Aug 3.6revise SOS oral arg outline (1.5); revise responses to SOS, DHHSOFs (2.8); revise Johnson Dec (0.3)
26-Aug 3.2 Research and revise draft oral arg outline (4)
27-Aug 6.4
Moot oral argument (1); meeting regarding oral argument withRPH (0.7); review of cases pertaining to oral argument (3.7);revision of outline (1)
28-Aug 5.7Revise oral arg outline and other argument preparations (2.1);revisions to draft Reply Brief portions (3.6)
29-Aug 4.9Research for and revisions to draft Reply Brief (3.4); moot oralargument (2); revise oral argument outline (0.5)
30-Aug 3.0 Moot oral argument (3)
31-Aug 6.0Revise outline and notes for oral argument (3); review briefs fororal argument (1); review cases for oral argument (2)
TOTAL 142.3
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 40
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 40 of 51
Sep-12 Running Total:
Date Total Summary
2-Sep 5.3Incorporate edits to opp to motion to strike (2.8); prepare for oralargument (2.5)
3-Sep 5.8moot oral argument (2); edits to reply in support of motion to strike(2.8); revise oral argument outline (1)
4-Sep 7.0travel to New Orleans (6 hrs @ half-time); review briefs for oralargument (2); revise outline (2)
5-Sep 10.5revise outline (1.5); court hearing (3); travel back to NY (6 hrs @ half-time)
6-Sep7-Sep
10-Sep11-Sep12-Sep 4.7 Revision of SOS exhibits list (4.7)13-Sep 4.0 Revise exhibit list, locate exhibits (4)14-Sep15-Sep 3.0 Edits to PTO (1.2)16-Sep 4.5 Review draft PTO (3); review defs' proposed trial exhibits (1.5)17-Sep 5.2 Review and edit draft pre-trial order (5.2)
18-Sep 8.4
Review of defs proposed trial exhibits (5.3); draft objections tocertain defense exhibits (1.4); review proposed correspondence toopposing counsel (0.2); edits to draft opposition to proposed statusconference (1.5)
19-Sep 8.3
call with co-counsel regarding trial strategies (0.4); witnessdocument review and outline drafting (2.4); work on exhibitobjections list in anticipation of meet and confer (3); review of defs'pretrial inserts and preliminary objections (0.9); draft responses todefs' preliminary objections in anticipation of meet and confer (1.6)
20-Sep 7.0 Meet and confer (5); co-counsel meeting re: steps forward (2)
21-Sep 3.5 Drafting proposed new PTO sections regarding contested facts (3.5)22-Sep 2.5 revise PTO (2.5)23-Sep 5.2 Revisions to and edits for PTO (5.2)
24-Sep 5.2Assistance to FF with PTO preparation (4.5); edits to letter to Ct onoutstanding issues (0.7)
25-Sep 9.3Work on PCOL (4.6); begin research on relevance motions in limine(4.2); work on witness lists (0.5)
26-Sep 11.1conference call to discuss topics for witnesses (1.3); prep for pretrialconference (2.5); work on witness outlines (3); edits to PFOF (4.3)
27-Sep 7.0
travel to New Orleans for pretrial conference (6 hrs @ half-time);prepare for conference (2); attend conference (1); post-conferencestrategy session (1)
28-Sep 9.0edits to proposed injunction (2); draft witness outlines (1); returntravel from pretrial conference (6 hrs @ half-time)
29-Sep 0.030-Sep 0.0
TOTAL 126.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 41
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 41 of 51
Oct-12
Date Total Summary
1-Oct 6.5
organize files (0.5); witness prep call (1); revise MILs (1.5);witness outlines (0.5); meeting re: PTO (1); call withopposing counsel re: PTO (0.5); revise PFOF/COL (2)
2-Oct 9.0Preparation for trial, including work on witness outlines andwitness documents; review revised PTO
3-Oct 10.2Work on witness outlines (5.7); review and revisePFOF/PCOL (4.5)
4-Oct 13.5 Witness outlines (3.8); revising/editing PFOF/PCOL (9.7)
5-Oct 7.1
Edits to and finalization/filing of PFOF/PCOL (5.4); co-counsel call (.5); call with opposing counsel (0.2); finaledits to PTO (1.0)
6-Oct 4.0 witness outline preparation (4)
7-Oct 7.3witness outline preparation (3); revisions to motions inlimine (4.3)
8-Oct 10.3Trial preparations, including witness outlines anddocuments, and revisions to motions in limine (10.3)
9-Oct 11.0Trial preparations, including witness outlines anddocuments, and review of defs' motions in limine (9.5)
10-Oct 8.0 Trial preparations, including witness outlines
11-Oct 10.8Trial moot session with co-counsel (5); strategy meetingwith co-counsel (1); revisions to witness outlines (4.8)
12-Oct 10.0 Trial preparations (10)
13-Oct 15.0Trial preparations (12); Travel to New Orleans (6 hrs @half-time)
14-Oct 12.0Trial preparations, including client preparations for trial(12)
15-Oct 14.0 trial (9); trial prep (5)16-Oct 14.0 trial (9); trial prep (5)17-Oct 7.0 trial (7)19-Oct 6.0 Return travel from New Orleans (6 hrs @ half-time)20-Oct21-Oct 4.7 Begin research for post-trial brief (4.7)
23-Oct 2.5Edits to/revisions of motion in support of admitting defs'factual statements
24-Oct 4.7Research for post-trial brief; drafting of portions of post-trial brief
TOTAL 187.6
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 42
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 42 of 51
Nov-12
Date Total Summary
1-Nov2-Nov 1.1 Research portion of post-trial brief3-Nov 2.0 Edits on portion of post-trial brief4-Nov5-Nov6-Nov7-Nov 0.08-Nov 0.09-Nov 3.5 Work on portion of post-trial brief
10-Nov 0.011-Nov 1.0 Edits to motion to amend caption12-Nov13-Nov 0.014-Nov 0.015-Nov16-Nov17-Nov
TOTAL 7.6
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 43
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 43 of 51
Dhiren Patel (Time Records)
8/23/2012 Scott v. Schedler 0819-013 Preparing binder forcited cases in briefs
2.5
10/1/2012 Scott V Schedler 0819-013 Cite check, blue book 3
10/2/2012 Scott v Schedler 0819-013 Review brief and makecorrections
6
10/4/2012 Scott v Schedler 0819-013 Review brief and makeEdits; TOC & TOA
7
10/5/2012 Scott v Schedler 0819-013 Review brief, Citecheck and make edits;TOC & TOA
11
Total 31.5 hours
28/24/2012 Scott v. Schedler 0819-013 ELMO research(contacted Court)
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 44
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 44 of 51
Joseph Puma (Time Records)Date Description Number of hours10/11/2011 Met with attorneys to discuss assignment 0.510/12/2011 Reviewed and organized documents physical and
electronic documents; read attorney memodescribing assigment; corresponded with attorneys reassignement
2
10/13/2011 Searched for, reviewed, and scanned documents,corresponded with attorneys and staff re project
3
10/14/2011 Organized physical and electronic documents forassignment, located physical files held in storage,met with attorney re assignment, prepareddocuments to send to vendor, communicatedspecifications and met vendor for pickup
3
10/17/2011 Printed documents per attorney request, met withattorney to review documents, coordinated withvendor re document production
2.25
10/18/2011 Met with attorney for document review, organizeddocuments to send to vendor, communicatedspecificiations to vendor
2.75
10/19/2011 Met with attorney, organized documents receivedfrom vendor, saved documents to netowrk, andmade redactions to documents per attorneyinstructions
3
10/20/2011 Saved electronic documents to network,corresponded with attorney, delivered documents toattorney, printed documents
2
10/21/2011 Prepared production documents for shipment 1.2510/24/2011 Prepared production documents for shipment,
flagged issues and coordinated with vendor re errorin production.
4
10/25/2011 Scanned, Bates stamped, saved, and organizedproduction documents, prepared documents to sendto vendor, printed documents for attorney review
6.5
10/26/2011 Bates stamped documents, produced CDs andprepared e-documents for shipment via CD to co-counsel.
4
10/28/2011 Organized documents 1.511/2/2011 Prepared binder for attorney, Bates stamped
documents, prepared and organized depositionexhibits, printed pleadings per attorney request,updated electronic docket, checked for arrival of CDcontaining case documents
4.5
11/3/2011 Organized documents and coordinated with vendorto process documents, shipped CD with electroniccopies of documents to co-counsel
2.25
11/4/2011 Prepared deposition exhibits, met with attorneys redocuments, supervised shipment of exhibits
2.5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 45
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 45 of 51
11/7/2011 Organized documents and coordinated with vendorto process documents, communicated with projectattorneys and managing attorneys re status and nextsteps
5.5
11/10/2011 Prepared deposition exhibits, corresponded withattorney re project status, met with, printed andorganized materials for outside vendor
8.5
11/11/2011 Met with attorneys regarding deposition exhibitpreparation, prepared deposition exhibits, readiedmaterials for shipment, traveled to and from courierservice to ship materials
6.5
11/15/2011 Updated document and CD index, sent documents toco-counsel and corresponded with co-counsel tosend documents and announce shipment
0.5
11/18/2011 Saved electronic copies of deposition transcripts tonetwork, organized electronic copies of depositionexhibits
3
11/21//2011 Saved electronic copies of deposition transcripts andexhibits to network
1
11/22/2011 Saved electronic copies of deposition transcripts tonetwork, organized electronic copies of depositionexhibits
2.5
11/28/2011 Saved electronic copies of deposition transcripts tonetwork, organized electronic copies of depositionexhibits, met with attorney re case status, preparedstorage system for deposition transcripts per attnyinstructions
1
12/12/2011 Saved and organized depostition transcripts andexhibits on internal drive
1.5
12/13/2011 0.3312/14/2011 Organized deposisiton exhibits, printed depositon
outlines, called attorney hotel and UPS to coordinatelogistics
2.75
12/15/2011 Printed and organized deposition exhibits,coordinated with vendor, met with attorney
0.75
12/16/2011 Printed, organized, and prepared deposition exhibitsfor shipment. Gathered supplies to include inshipment. Met with attorney to review documents
8
12/19/2011 coordinated with vendor, prepared documents forvendor processing, met with attorney re assignment
1
12/20/2011 Corresponded with attorney regarding assignment,reviewed documents for LDF production, met with ITdepartment re production
2
12/21/2011 reviewed deposition exhibits, organizied depositiontranscripts, met with case attorney and managingattorney re assignment, updated electronic copies ofpleadings
3
12/22/2011 gathered documents per attorney request,electronically organized deposition exhibits
3
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 46
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 46 of 51
12/23/2011 prepared documents for production for vendorprocessing
2
12/27/2011 Produced CDs for opposing counsel and internalrecords, saved and organized documentselectronically on internal drive, sent depoisitiontranscript per attorney request, drafted memo tosupervisor with instructions for document production
5
1/9/2012 Reviewed and edited brief, downloaded andorganized electronic copies of deposition transcripts,met with supervisor re document organizationproject, sent electronic copies of depositions toattorney
6
1/10/2012 reviewed and edited brief; gathered and organizedexhibts for filing
6.25
1/11/2012 Drafted and reviewed PSJ Declaration; qualitychecked all exhibits
7
1/12/2012 updated pleadings; transposed edits to master copyof brief; organized exhibits electronically
X thru 3:30
1/13/2012 Met with attorney, sent documents to vendor forprocessing, organized electronic copies ofdepositions
3.5
1/18/2012 Revised declaration; printed emails from andcorresponded with attorneys
1
1/24/2012 compiled and organized exhibits for summaryjudgment; revised declaration for summaryjudgement filing; corresponded with attorneys andsupervisor re project
6.5
1/26/2012 printed and organized exhibits for filing; Batesstamped, organized, and circulated documents
6.75
1/27/2012 cite checked brief; prepared documents fordeposition and organized them for shipment
8.5
1/29/2012 Drafted TOA and TOC for partial summary judgmentbrief; cite checked brief; organized electronic copiesof exhibits
5
1/31/2012 prepared exhibits and declaration for partial summaryjudgment filing; cite checked and edited brief forfiling, prepared TOC and TOA
11.5
2/1/2012 Prepared documents for shipment; drafted coverletter for court enclosing courtesy copies, updatedpleadings folder
6.5
2/3/2012 organized and prepared documents for processing byvendor; updated pleadings folder; organizeddiscovery documents on internal drive
3
2/8/2012 worked on oral argument prep binder,correspondence with attorney
0.5
2/9/2012 organized and prepared documents for processing byvendor
2.5
2/21/2012 Gathered documents for oral argument prep binders;electronically organized deposition prep documents;bates stamped documents
2
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 47
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 47 of 51
2/22/2012 updated pleadings folder; burned CDs, correspondedwith attorneys re CDs and shipped CDs
2
2/23/2012 Updated pleadings folder; pulled exhibits andorganized documents; coordinated binder production
3
2/24/2012 updated pleadings folder; prepared binders for oralargument prep, and shipped and circulated them
0.75
3/5/2012 gathered exhibits, drafted supplemental declaration,saved deposition transcripts to electronic folder,updated pleadings folder, organized exhibits on PPGdrive, organized hard copies of deposition transcripts
5
3/7/2012 Prepared TOC and TOA for brief 23/8/2012 Revised TOC and TOA for brief, updated pleadings,
cite and quote checked brief, reviewed exhibits andfiled brief with attorney
5
3/21/2012 Prepared document productions 33/26/2012 Bates stamped documents, burned on CDs and sent
to attorneys and co-counsel3
3/28/2012 Quality check of confidential document production,Bates stamped documents, burned documents toCDs, sent documents to co-counsel, and organizedfiles electronically
5
3/30/2012 cited checked and prepared brief for filing; updatedpleadings
2.5
4/16/2012 cited checked and prepared brief for filing; updatedpleadings
4
4/17/2012 Proofread and filed brief; burned CD; prepared andmailed shipment for oral argument prep
2.5
5/2/2012 printed materials for books for court, drafted TOC forbooks, corresponded with attorney
0.75
5/3/2012 gathered materials for books for court, revised TOC,created cover, coordinated with copy staff, did qualitycheck, and corresponded with attorney
1
5/14/2012 Reserached and added citations to draft brief,inventoried CDs containing production documentsand revised inventory document, and correspondedwith attorney
2
5/16/2012 Saved deposition transcript to internal drive andcorresponded with attorneys
0.25
5/29/2012 Prepared brief for filing (TOC and TOA finalization);compiled list of deposition exhibits forwitness/deposition list for trial; corresponded withattorneys re status of project
5
5/30/2012 restored production documents on system after dataloss, compiled discovery materials and correspondedwith co-counsel, per attorney request, finalized draftexhibit list
5
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 48
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 48 of 51
5/31/2012 added production documents to system; preparedCD of production documents; corresponded withattorney re shipment of CD and draft witness andexhibit lists
2.5
6/6/2012 Obtained company check, copied and mailed it tocourt reporter, and corresponded with court reporter.
0.25
6/14/2012 Saved recently filed pleadings to internal documentdatabase; updated electronic pleadings folder
0.4
6/20/2012 Organized electronic copies of deposition transcriptsand deposition exhibits on internal drive
1.1
6/25/2012 Pulled exhibits for SJ liability brief 2.756/26/2012 Pulled exhibits for SJ liability brief; prepared
materials for oral argument prep binders, met withsupervisor
6.6
6/27/2012 pulled exhibits for SJ liability brief, proofread 8.17/2/2012 Organized exhibits for SJ liability brief, including
coordination with vendor and attorney0.7
7/6/2012 Prepared oral argument prep binders; correspondedwith interns
3
7/11/2012 updated pleadings and sent to attorney; updatedtable of contents
0.5
7/13/2012 Prepare job for vendor; reviewed brief for filing 27/23/2012 Circulated deposition transcripts to attorneys; printed
out deposition transcripts per attorney request;updated pleadings folder; organized electronic files ofdeposition exhibits
1
TOTAL 259.98
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 49
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 49 of 51
{00032548.DOC}
La Tanya Harry (Time Keeping Records for Scott v. Schedler)
DATE DESCRIPTION HOURS01/09/2012 Edited brief citations 4.501/10/2012 Edited brief citations 1.001/12/2012
Updated pleadings folder;transposed edits to mastercopy of brief; organizedexhibits electronically
3.5
01/13/2012 Met with attorney to discussbrief; assisted Joseph withsending documents toInventus for processing;organized electronic copiesof depositions
01/25/2012 Cite checked brief 2.01/26/2012 Organized exhibits and cite
checked brief6.75
01/27/2012 Cite checked brief; prepareddocuments for deposition,and organized them forshipment
8.5
01/30/2012 Prepared documents forfiling
2.0
01/31/2012 Assisted Joseph withPreparing exhibits anddeclaration for partialsummary judgment filing;cite checked and editedbrief for filing, preparedTOC and TOA
11.5
03/08/2012 Revised TOC and TOA forbrief; updated pleadingsfolder; cite and quotechecked brief; reviewedexhibits and filed brief
5
03/09/2012 Completed filing process 2.00
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 50 of 51
{00032548.DOC}
05/29/2012 Prepared brief for filing(TOC and TOAfinalization); compiled listof deposition exhibits forwitness/deposition list fortrial; corresponded withattorneys re status of project
2.75
06/27/2012 Pulled and reviewedexhibits; cite checked andedited MSJ brief
5
06/28/2012 Pulled exhibits forSummary Judgment liabilitybrief; prepared materials fororal argument prep binders;met with Melissa to discussnext steps in oral argumentprep process
6.6
06/29/2012 Continued editing andpulling exhibits for MSJbrief
5.0
08/16/2012 Assembled documents fortrial prep
2.0
10/05/2012 Assisted with filing prep 3.0
Total 71.1
Exhibit A(LDF Time Records)
Page 51
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-7 Filed 02/26/13 Page 51 of 51
Summary of LDF Expenses
Process Servers & Filing Fees 2,438.79$Depositions & Transcripts 17,936.10$Research 473.64$Mail 2,033.26$Telephone 82.60$Photocopying, Document Review & Production 8,488.39$Air Travel 12,942.45$Car Service, Taxi 1,360.83$Car Rental 4,006.43$Hotel 11,176.95$
TOTAL: 60,939.44$
CATEGORIES
Process Servers, Court Filings
Process Server - 10/24/2011 $ 334.32Process Server - 10/25/2011 $ 305.04Process Server - 12/16/2011 $ 320.89Process Server - 1/3/2012 $ 250.00Process Server - 10/12/12 $ 378.54Pro hac vice motions $ 850.00
SUBTOTAL: 2,438.79$
Depositions & Transcripts
Deposition 11/8/11 Samuel Guillory $ 1,086.80Deposition 11/10/11 Rose Greene $ 928.10Deposition 11/10/11 Johnnie Tyson $ 279.10Deposition 11/15/11 Diane Batts $ 1,077.40Deposition 11/9/11 Dwayne Joubert $ 631.10Deposition 11/16/11 Darlene Hughes $ 490.90Deposition 11/17/11 Kim Ricks $ 394.10Deposition 11/17/11 Brad Coney $ 431.30Deposition 11/8/11 Chandra Kandula $ 318.30Deposition 11/15/11 John Mancuso $ 450.00Deposition 11/17/11 Pamela Denise Harris $ 570.80Deposition 11/9/11 Wendell Young $ 772.20Deposition 11/16/11 Monica McDaniels $ 386.90Deposition 11/10/11 Catherine Michiels $ 377.70Deposition 11/16/11 Christopher Chase $ 605.30
Exhibit B
LDF Expenses (in Total and by Category)
Page 1 of 6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-8 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 6
Exhibit B
LDF Expenses (in Total and by Category)
Deposition 12/19/11 Donna Durand $ 965.20Deposition 12/19/11 Joanne Reed $ 783.40Deposition 12/20/11 William Crawford $ 786.00Deposition 12/20/11 Catherine McRichie $ 388.50Deposition 1/30/12 Angie Rogers $ 1,379.80Deposition 1/31/12 Christine Weatherford $ 540.10Deposition 1/31/12 Elsie Cangelosi $ 511.50Transcript oral argument 4/20/12 before the Honorable Jane TricheMilazzo $ 293.25Deposition 5/10/12 Luther Scott $ 246.85
Deposition 6/7/12 Alice Harris Lewis, Alvin Lewis, Jerome Boykin $ 310.85Deposition 11/9/11 Susan Eversull $ 211.70Deposition 11/9/11 Terri Eckles $ 265.00Deposition 11/9/11 Stephanie Brooks $ 261.80Deposition 6/6/2012 Ernest Johnson $ 349.30Deposition 6/6/2012 Rev. Taylor $ 428.85Deposition 7/12/12 Charles Heckard $ 186.80Deposition 9/13/12 Shawn Banks $ 693.20Deposition 9/13/12 Yolanda Johnson Ash $ 534.00
SUBTOTAL: 17,936.10$
Research
Research: Document retreival in ED La (Case: ACORN v. Fowler),4/6/2011 $ 399.00On-Line Research (Gogo inflight internet) $ 12.95On-Line Research (Gogo inflight internet) (3) $ 24.85On-Line Research (Gogo inflight internet) (2) $ 16.94On-Line Research (Gogo inflight internet) (2) $ 19.90
SUBTOTAL: 473.64$
Description Amount
Mail to Co-Counsel (Discovery Documents) 11/3/11 $ 16.19Mailings (2) to Defendant (Discovery Documents to DCFS);11/9/2011, 11/11/11 $ 47.463 mailings 11/15/11, 11/16/11, 11/18/11 $ 92.133 overnight mailings, 12/16/11 (deposition materials) $ 290.13Mailing 12/9/11 $ 13.273 mailings, paid 1/9/12 $ 99.76mailing 1/9/12 $ 28.13
Page 2 of 6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-8 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 6
Exhibit B
LDF Expenses (in Total and by Category)
8 overnight mailing, 1/27/12 and 2/1/12 (partial summary judgment) $ 325.52mailing to co-counsel, 2/22/12 $ 5.907 overnight mailings, 2/3/12 through 2/7/12 (partial summaryjudgment) $ 107.562 mailings, 2/9/12 and 2/14/12 $ 43.71mailing 3/6/12 $ 54.493 mailings, 4/18/12 $ 25.96mailing, 5/9/12 $ 20.93mailing, 3/31/12 $ 13.953 mailings, paid 5/10/12 $ 33.094 overnight mailings, 4/11/12 - 4/17/12 $ 150.836 overnight mailings, 5/4/12 (settlement offers) $ 187.77mailing, paid 6/6/12 $ 5.96mailing, paid 6/30/12 $ 11.92overnight mailings, 7/5/12 (summary judgment) $ 107.14overnight mailings 8/31, 9/1/2012 (summary judgment replies) $ 176.98mailing, paid 10/8/12 $ 44.602 overnight mailings, 10/12/12 (trial materials) $ 129.88
SUBTOTAL: $ 2,033.26
Telephone
Conference Call, 2/13/12 $ 15.12Conference Call, 2/16/12 $ 8.14Conference Call, 2/23/12 $ 3.68Conference Call, 5/3/12 $ 3.63Conference Call, 5/15/12 $ 4.99Conference Call, 8/3/12 $ 6.56Conference Call, 8/16/12 $ 11.37Conference Call, 8/20/12 $ 7.09Conference Calls, 9/3/12; 9/24/12; 9/26/12 $ 22.02
SUBTOTAL: 82.60$
Photocopying, Document Review & Production
Description Date Paid Amountdoc scans responses to discovery requests 9/23/2011 $ 532.30doc scans document production 11/23/2011 $ 85.23doc scans document production 11/23/2011 $ 108.52doc scans document production 11/23/2011 $ 320.30doc scans document production 11/23/2011 $ 325.68Photocopying (Kinko's) 12/8/2011 $ 89.57
Page 3 of 6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-8 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 6
Exhibit B
LDF Expenses (in Total and by Category)
File conversions of electronic documents produced by defendants;printing 12/29/2011 $ 88.24File conversions of electronic documents produced by defendants;printing defendants documents 12/29/2011 $ 3,345.61B&W copies, bindings 12/29/2011 $ 177.38Blowbacks, file conversion 4/24/2012 $ 133.60B&W copies 4/24/2012 $ 341.12Blowbacks, EDD 4/24/2012 $ 249.75Blowbacks, scans, EDD -OCR, tabs, bindings 4/24/2012 $ 331.26Scanned pages, EED OCR 5/22/2012 $ 93.48Blowbacks, tabs, bindings 5/22/2012 $ 394.85B&W copies, blowbacks, tabs, bindings 5/22/2012 $ 212.97Scanned pages, EDD file conversion 5/22/2012 $ 252.20Blowbacks, tabs, bindings 5/22/2012 $ 258.53Blowbacks, tabs, bindings 5/22/2012 $ 64.66Copying Expense 6/13/2012 $ 4.42Scanned EED OCR 10/8/2012 $ 57.24Assemble blowbacks 12/7/2012 $ 243.25Assemble blowbacks 12/7/2012 $ 131.82Assemble blowbacks 12/7/2012 $ 400.13B&W copies, tabs, binding; paid 12/7/12 12/7/2012 $ 112.94B&W Copies; paid 12/7/12 12/7/2012 $ 117.00B&W Copies; paid 12/7/12 12/7/2012 $ 16.34
SUBTOTAL: 8,488.39$
Air Travel
Description AmountDH, 7/14/11, to New Orleans for settlement conference and statusconference 487.40$NK, 11/14/11 to Baton Rouge for depositions $ 495.80DH, 11/7/11 and 11/14/11 to Baton Rouge for depositions $ 806.60RH, 11/14/11 to Baton Rouge for depositions $ 778.79NK, 12/18/11 to Baton Rouge for depositions $ 752.80NK, 1/29/12 to Baton Rouge for depositions $ 757.20DH, 1/29/12 to Baton Rouge for depositions 340.37$DH, 4/19/12 to New Orleans for Partial SJ argument $ 560.40
DH, 5/8/12 to New Orleans for settlement conference and deposition $ 373.20
NK, 5/8/12 to New Orleans for settlement conference and deposition $ 545.20NK, 6/5/12 to New Orleans for depositions $ 429.00NK&DH, 9/5/12 to New Orleans for Summary Judgment $ 1,413.20NK, 9/27/12 to New Orleans for Pre-Trial Conference; DH, 9/27/12for Pre-Trial Conference $ 1,541.69
Page 4 of 6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-8 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 6
Exhibit B
LDF Expenses (in Total and by Category)
NK, 10/13/12 to New Orleans for trial; DH 10/8/12 to New Orleansfor trial prep; 10/13/12 to New Orleans for trial $ 3,660.80
SUBTOTAL: 12,942.45$
Car Service / Taxi
Description Amount
DH, airport roundtrip 7/14/11, 7/18 $ 78.00DH, 2 roundtrips to airport, 11/11 $ 125.84NK, 2 round-trips to airport, 12/11 $ 108.15DH to airport, 1/29/12 $ 50.04NK to airport, 1/29/12 $ 36.62NK from airport, 1/31/12 $ 35.88DH from airport, 2/1/12 $ 35.10NK to and from airport 4/12 $ 115.00DH to and from airport, 4/21/12 and 4/23/12 $ 118.00NK to and from airport $ 87.62DH to airport, 5/9/12 $ 41.00NK to airport, 6/8/12 $ 48.10NK, to airport, 7/8/12 $ 33.66NK 9/3/12 (2); 9/4/12 (2); 9/6/12; 9/19/12; 9/25/12 $ 141.80DH, 9/28/12 $ 59.00NK, 9 car service receipts: 9/29/12; 10/3/12; 10/5/12; 10/8/12;10/10/12 (2); 10/11/12 (2);10/12; 10/13; 10/20/12 $ 247.02
SUBTOTAL: 1,360.83$
Car Rental
Description Amount
DH, New Orleans, 7/15/11 $ 301.64DH, Baton Rouge, 11/7/11 $ 289.83RH, Baton Rouge, 11/18/11 $ 836.85RH, Baton Rouge, 12/18/11 $ 328.15DH, Baton Rouge, 2/1/12 $ 345.28DH, New Orleans, 4/19/12 $ 265.59DH, New Orleans 5/9/12 $ 238.99NK, New Orleans, 6/5/12 $ 329.65DH, New Orleans 10/9/12 through10/19/12 (trial) $ 1,070.45
SUBTOTAL: 4,006.43$
Page 5 of 6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-8 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 6
Exhibit B
LDF Expenses (in Total and by Category)
Hotel
Description Amount
DH, New Orleans 7/14/11 (1 night) $ 275.34
DH, Baton Rouge, 11/7/11 - 11/9/11, 11/14/11 -11/17/11 (6 nights) $ 672.35RH, Baton Rouge, 11/14/11 - 11/18/11 (4 nights) $ 492.68NK, Baton Rouge 11/14/11 - 11/18/11 (4 nights) $ 492.68RH, Baton Rouge, 12/18/11 - 12/20/11 (3 nights) $ 301.71NK, Baton Rouge, 12/18/11 - 12/20/11 (3 nights) $ 301.71NK, Baton Rouge, 1/29/12 - 1/31/12 (2 nights) $ 257.64
DH, Baton Rouge and New Orleans, 1/29/12 - 1/31/12 (3 nights) $ 559.35DH, New Orleans 4/19/12 - 4/20/12 (2 nights) $ 604.25NK, New Orleans 4/19/12 - 4/20/12 (2 nights) $ 604.25NK, New Orleans, 5/9/12 - 5/11/12 (3 nights) $ 649.95DH, New Orleans, 5/9/12 - 5/11/12 (3 nights) $ 649.95NK 6/5/12 - 6/7/12 (3 nights) $ 476.85DH, New Orleans, 10/13/12 - 10/19/12 (6 nights) $2,419.12NK, New Orleans, 10/13/12 - 10/19/12 (6 nights) $2,419.12
SUBTOTAL: 11,176.95$
Page 6 of 6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-8 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 6
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR. and the LOUISIANA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP, Plaintiffs,
v. TOM SCHEDLER in his official capacity as the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY SONNIER, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Children & Family Services, and BRUCE D. GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health & Hospitals, Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW
DECLARATION OF RONALD L. WILSON
I, Ronald L. Wilson, hereby declare the following:
1. I am counsel in the above-captioned case, and have worked with the
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Find (“LDF”), Project Vote, and Fried, Frank,
Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP (“Fried Frank”) for in this litigation.
2. I have served as local counsel on this case since its inception, as is
required for visiting attorneys who seek pro hac vice admission to the Eastern District
under Local Rule 83.2.5.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 5
2
3. I respectfully submit this declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ application
for an award of their attorneys’ fees and costs (the “Fee Application”), pursuant to this
Court’s Order awarding fees, dated January 22, 2013. Doc. 436.
4. The Complaint in this case was filed in April 19, 2011, but my work on
the case began before that date. Before filing, Plaintiffs’ counsel conducted background
factual and legal research into the claims raised. We tried to resolve the issues raised in
our Complaint without litigation, as is contemplated by the National Voter Registration
Act (“NVRA”), by sending Defendants a notice letter in January 2011. Our letter advised
the Defendants of non-compliance with the statute, and requested a meeting to discuss to
work towards a resolution of the non-compliance. Defendants provided no meaningful
response to this request within the 90-day statutory notice period. Consequently, after the
notice period delineated in the statute had lapsed, Plaintiffs filed the Complaint. At the
time of our January 2011 notice letter, the number of hours that I had spent on this case
was relatively low.
5. Ultimately, however, as this Court is aware, despite several good faith
attempts by Plaintiffs to settle this case (both before and during litigation), our efforts
were refused.
FEES AND COSTS
6. Plaintiffs seek a total award of $70,880 for my fees. Detailed records, as
well as a summary of my professional fees for which reimbursement is sought are
attached as Exhibit A. During the course of this matter, I recorded my time
contemporaneously, along with a description of the affiliated tasks.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 5
3
7. Plaintiffs do not seek fees for time spent in connection with our work on
this fee petition, or for meals in connection with our work on this case. Plaintiffs also do
not seek other expenses I incurred in connection with this case.
8. I seek an hourly rate of $400 per hour in this case. This lodestar is a
reasonable market rate for an attorney in New Orleans, and the surrounding parts of the
Eastern District, with my level of experience. As reflected in Exhibit A, I spent 177.2
hours on this case.
9. I received my J.D. from Tulane University in 1975, and my B.A. from
Louisiana State University at New Orleans in 1972. In addition to Louisiana, I have been
admitted to the bar in New York, the District of Columbia, Colorado, and Oregon.
10. For the nearly four decades of my practice in Louisiana, I have worked
primarily on civil rights and other public interest cases. The areas in which I have
practiced include employment discrimination, housing discrimination, school
desegregation, voting rights, police misconduct, prison conditions, freedom of speech,
and freedom of association.
11. Moreover, I have litigated over thirteen voting rights cases in Louisiana,
many with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (“LDF”). Among the
voting cases that I have co-litigated with LDF is Chisom v. Roemer, 501 U.S. 380 (1991),
in which the Supreme Court overturned a Fifth Circuit ruling that the Voting Rights Act
did not apply to elections of judges of the Louisiana State Supreme Court.
12. I also co-litigated Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987), in which the
Supreme Court held that Louisiana’s Creationism Act violated the Establishment Clause.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 5
4
13. I currently serve as the president of the Louisiana Legal Aid Bureau. I
previously served as president of the ACLU of Louisiana.
14. My work has been recognized by a number of professional, civic, and
educational groups for my work. In 1986, I was named the American Civil Liberties
Union of Louisiana’s Cooperating Attorney of the Year award. In 1987, I received the
Louisiana State Bar Association’s Pro Bono Publico Award for Outstanding
Achievements in the Area of Pro Bono Legal Service. In 1997, I received the University
of New Orleans Ernest “Dutch” Morial Chapter Alumni of the Year award. In 1999, I
was awarded the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana’s Ben Smith award for the
advancement of civil liberties in Louisiana. In 2008, I received the Southern Christian
Leadership Conference’s Community Service Award. This year, I am a recipient of the
Emmitt J. Douglas Memorial Award.
RETAINER OF OUT OF STATE COUNSEL
15. Voting rights litigation is well known to be complex, costly, and fact-
intensive. Prosecuting a voting rights claim such as the NVRA claim successfully
brought by Plaintiffs requires a significant investment of resources. Furthermore, electing
to represent indigent plaintiffs, such as those who would be natural plaintiffs in an NVRA
Section 7 claim, requires that those resources be invested upfront, and with potentially no
fees awarded at the end.
16. Although there are of course numerous Louisiana attorneys like myself
with experience in general civil rights issues, there is a paucity of in-state practitioners
here who could have served as lead counsel in this case. As the Court knows, Scott v.
Schedler, et al. was a complex litigation, lasting over 18 months from the filing of the
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 5
5
Complaint alone. Even though I am very familiar with voting rights litigation, as a
private practitioner, I could not have litigated this case without support. My
understanding is that LDF and our other co-counsel expended several thousand hours of
attorney time, as well as tens of thousands of dollars in litigation expenses. This is simply
not an investment that a private practitioner in this District could make independently.
Even with significant voting rights experience, I, as most private practitioners, do not
have the time or resources to serve as lead counsel for indigent clients in a case, such as
this one, without any guarantee of remuneration. For these same resource-related reasons,
I am doubtful that even two private practitioners in the New Orleans area could have
undertaken this litigation together.
17. Accordingly, it was reasonable that this case was litigated by out-of-state
attorneys with voting rights expertise.
CONCLUSION
18. For the reasons set forth above and in Plaintiffs’ supporting memorandum
of law, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court award them attorneys’ fees in the
amount of $70,880 for my work in connection with this matter in addition to the amounts
sought by co-counsel.
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to
the best of my knowledge.
Executed on February 25, 2013 /s Ronald L. Wilson
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 5
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/1/2012 Conference call with Dale Ho (NAACP.LDF); review
materials for same.
650.00 3.60 2,340.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/2/2012 Review motion for SJ and background materials; p/c
w/ M. de Leeuw.
280.00 1.30 364.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/3/2012 NVRA - Review background materials; e-mails w/ M.
de Leeuw.
280.00 4.00 1,120.00
David, I Partner 8/5/2012 Review litigation file and pleadings. 650.00 2.00 1,300.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/6/2012 Review materials; multiple calls and emails re:
staffing and case; research.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/7/2012 Conference call; prepare for same. 650.00 3.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/8/2012 Review cases and case file; multiple calls and emails
Loffler; conference call with other counsel.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/10/2012 Calls Loffler and Ho; research. 650.00 1.30 845.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/10/2012 Coordinating with MAO on pro hac vice admissions;
gathering materials necessary for pro hac admission.
280.00 0.40 112.00
David, I Partner 8/12/2012 Continued review of litigation file and key
documents.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/13/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: pre-trial order; review
materials re: same.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/13/2012 Drafting and gathering materials for pro hac forms for
M. de Leeuw and I. David.
280.00 1.40 392.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/13/2012 Meeting with MDL, J. Loffler and D. Yellin regarding
case. Call with co-counsel. Begin work on pre-trial
order.
400.00 3.40 1,360.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/13/2012 Conf. w/ M. de Leeuw, J. Loffler, E. Sollie; attention 280.00 0.80 224.00
Exhibit A
to e-mails.
Deguzman, M Paralegal 8/13/2012 Download deposition transcripts and exhibits from
website and update Livenote and S: Drive per E.
Sollie request; Update electronic litigation binders.
200.00 4.60 920.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/14/2012 Multiple calls, meetings and emails re: pretrial order;
review same; research.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/14/2012 Meeting with E. Sollie and D. Yellin; reading briefs;
editing pro hac forms
280.00 1.70 476.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/14/2012 Work on pre trial order. 400.00 8.60 3,440.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/14/2012 Conf. call w/ M. de Leeuw, E. Sollie, LDF, Project
Vote; Conf. w/ E. Sollie & J. Loffler; draft fact section
of Pre-Trial Order.
280.00 6.40 1,792.00
Deguzman, M Paralegal 8/14/2012 Assist in pulling requested deposition transcripts and
exhibits from website per request.
200.00 3.10 620.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/15/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: briefing; pretrial order;
review briefs; calls re: same; review and revise
pretrial order draft.
650.00 5.00 3,250.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/15/2012 Drafting and editing joint pre-trial order 280.00 12.60 3,528.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/15/2012 Work on pre trial order. Meet with D. Yellin and J.
Loffler regarding order. Send draft to MDL and I.
David for review.
400.00 12.30 4,920.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/15/2012 Work on PTO; conf. w/ E. Sollie & J. Loffler re:
same; prepare binders for M. de Leeuw.
280.00 8.70 2,436.00
Deguzman, M Paralegal 8/15/2012 Download exhibits and deposition transcripts and
update S: Drive and Livenote per E. Sollie request.
200.00 2.60 520.00
David, I Partner 8/16/2012 Review PTO; attention to SJ issues; meet and confer
issues.
650.00 2.00 1,300.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/16/2012 Review briefs and drafts. 650.00 3.00 1,950.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/16/2012 Meeting with E. Sollie and D. Yellin; review briefs
and statements of fact; review deposition transcripts.
280.00 1.60 448.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/16/2012 Reading depositions. 400.00 1.50 600.00
Page 1 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
Yellin, D Associate 8/16/2012 Conf. call w/ co-counsel; prepare binders; review
depositions.
280.00 5.70 1,596.00
Deguzman, M Paralegal 8/16/2012 Update livenote exhibits per E. Sollie request. 200.00 1.30 260.00
David, I Partner 8/17/2012 Correspondence. 650.00 0.70 455.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/17/2012 Review briefs and drafts; calls Dale Ho, team. 650.00 2.40 1,560.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/17/2012 Reviewing deposition transcripts in advance of trial
and pre-trial order submission.
280.00 1.30 364.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/17/2012 Reading depositions. Send out pre trial order. 400.00 1.70 680.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/17/2012 Read depositions, conf. w/ E. Sollie & J. Loffler 280.00 4.10 1,148.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/18/2012 Review materials; call Dale Ho. 650.00 2.10 1,365.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/19/2012 Research on sanctions questions regarding
statements in summary judgment opposition briefs.
280.00 2.70 756.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/19/2012 E-mails w/ E. Sollie & J. Loffler; read depositions. 280.00 2.00 560.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/20/2012 Multiple conference calls and emails re: current
status, briefing, etc.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/20/2012 Research and drafting motion to strike; conference
call over open issues; team meeting on deliverables
and discussion of new exhibits.
280.00 4.80 1,344.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/20/2012 Call with NAACP and Project Vote. Work on Motion
to Strike.
400.00 5.00 2,000.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/20/2012 P/c w/ Team re: M to Strike; conf w/ E. Sollie & J.
Loffler; draft argument section of motion to strike.
280.00 5.00 1,400.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/21/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: brief; review and revise
same; conference call.
650.00 4.30 2,795.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/21/2012 Drafting and editing motion to strike; drafting 280.00 9.00 2,520.00
declaration; reviewing materials subject to motion to
strike; conference call with all plaintiffs attorneys; call
with M. de Leeuw
Sollie, E Associate 8/21/2012 Work on drafting motion to strike. Call with NAACP
and PV regarding motion to strike and other
outstanding issues. Meetings with J. Loffler and D.
Yellin regarding motion to strike, pre trial order, and
other outstanding issues.
400.00 6.50 2,600.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/21/2012 Revise argument portion of motion to strike; review
and revise motion to strike.
280.00 6.50 1,820.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/22/2012 Drafting/editing/finalizing the motions to strike,
expedite, affidavit, exhibits, and all supporting
papers.
280.00 8.70 2,436.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/22/2012 Draft Motion to Strike, file Motion to Strike and
Motion to Expedite.
400.00 7.60 3,040.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/22/2012 E-mails w/ J. Loffer & E. Sollie; work on preparing
and filing motion to strike and related motion to
expedite.
280.00 6.60 1,848.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/23/2012 Mulitple calls and emails re: scheduling, motions,
and documents; review depositions.
650.00 2.30 1,495.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/23/2012 Review depositions. 400.00 2.10 840.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/23/2012 Review draft reply brief for SJ motion. 280.00 3.50 980.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/24/2012 Review and revise summary judgment papers;
multiple calls and emails with team re: status.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/24/2012 Edits to motion for summary judgement. 400.00 2.00 800.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/24/2012 Research duty to supplement disclosures; review
and revies draft SJ reply.
280.00 3.40 952.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/25/2012 Review and revise brief. 650.00 2.00 1,300.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/25/2012 Review and revise draft SJ reply. 280.00 2.50 700.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/27/2012 Calls and emails re: briefs and scheduling; review
and revise same.
650.00 1.50 975.00
Page 2 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
Loffler, J Associate 8/27/2012 Reviewing and proofing reply brief; e-mail
correspondence with team regarding motion to strike
reply.
280.00 1.60 448.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/27/2012 Review depositions. 400.00 3.00 1,200.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/27/2012 Review depositions; review and mark-up SJ reply. 280.00 4.40 1,232.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/28/2012 Conference call; calls re: SJ briefs and related
issues.
650.00 2.00 1,300.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/28/2012 Reviewing and editing reply brief for summary
judgment; correspondence with team; conference
call; reviewing summary judgment papers in
preparation for Thursday moot.
280.00 4.70 1,316.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/28/2012 Edit reply to motion for summary judgment. 400.00 2.20 880.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/28/2012 Conf. call w/ M. de Leeuw, E. Sollie, J. Loffler and co-
counsel; attention to e-mails.
280.00 1.30 364.00
Deguzman, M Paralegal 8/28/2012 Cite check brief per E. Sollie request. 200.00 3.50 700.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/29/2012 Prepare for moot; review documents; review and
revise brief.
650.00 2.50 1,625.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/29/2012 Reading summary judgment brief and opposition and
motion to strike materials to prep for Thursday moot.
280.00 1.10 308.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/29/2012 Reading depositons 400.00 2.00 800.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/29/2012 Review briefs for moot. 280.00 0.70 196.00
Deguzman, M Paralegal 8/29/2012 Assist in checking citations to briefs per E. Sollie
request.
200.00 3.60 720.00
David, I Partner 8/30/2012 Moot court for summary judgment. 650.00 3.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/30/2012 Prepare for and attened moot court. 650.00 4.50 2,925.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/30/2012 Participated in Moot for motion to strike and
summary judgment oral arguments.
280.00 3.00 840.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/30/2012 Moot with LDF and Project Vote. Prepare for moot. 400.00 4.40 1,760.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/30/2012 Moot for SJ Argument; prepare for same; review
depositions.
280.00 4.70 1,316.00
David, I Partner 8/31/2012 Attention to motion to strike issues; correspondence. 650.00 2.20 1,430.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 8/31/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: briefing and arguments,
travel, and related issues.
650.00 1.30 845.00
Loffler, J Associate 8/31/2012 Reviewing briefs filed by defendants for Motion to
Strike; drafting first draft of reply brief for Motion to
Strike; conference call with team; correspondence
with team
280.00 4.10 1,148.00
Sollie, E Associate 8/31/2012 Call with LDF and PV. Draft reply to motions to
strike.
400.00 5.30 2,120.00
Yellin, D Associate 8/31/2012 Work on reply for M to Strike. 280.00 6.70 1,876.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/1/2012 Review and revise reply brief; research. 650.00 1.90 1,235.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/1/2012 Review Johnson opposition re: Motion to Strike; e-
mail to J. Loffler & E. Sollie.
280.00 1.50 420.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/2/2012 Review and revise brief; emails and call re: same. 650.00 2.20 1,430.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/3/2012 Review brief; conference call; research. 650.00 1.30 845.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/3/2012 Conference call/moot for Wednesday oral argument;
turning changes to reply memo of law for motion to
strike.
280.00 2.80 784.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/3/2012 Conf. call w/ co-counsel re: moot for Sept. 5; Review
and revise reply and opposition papers re: motions to
strike; finalize and prepare same for filing.
280.00 6.40 1,792.00
David, I Partner 9/4/2012 Prepare for court hearing. 650.00 1.70 1,105.00
David, I Partner 9/4/2012 Travel from NYC to New Orleans [6 hours travel time
@ 50% lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
Page 3 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/4/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: court hearing; review all
filings.
650.00 6.00 3,900.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/4/2012 Travel to Louisiana for court hearing [6 hours travel
time @ 50% lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/4/2012 Coordinating filing of papers; e-mail correspondence
with team and MAO; reviewing surreply; reviewing
fees draft from motion to compel.
280.00 2.30 644.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/4/2012 Reviewing depositions 400.00 4.80 1,920.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/4/2012 Work on filings; review case materials; e-mails re:
binders for M. de Leeuw.
280.00 1.60 448.00
David, I Partner 9/5/2012 Attend oral argument and court conference. 650.00 4.50 2,925.00
David, I Partner 9/5/2012 Travel from New Orleans to NYC [6 hours travel time
@ 50% lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/5/2012 Attend Court hearing; post-hearing meeting, emails
and call.
650.00 10.00 6,500.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/5/2012 Return travel to NYC [6 hours travel time @ 50%
lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/5/2012 Work on pre trial order. 400.00 4.00 1,600.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/5/2012 Review sur-replies; conf. w/ E. Sollie & J. Loffler; p/c
w/ M. Rupp & E. Sollie re: oral argument.
280.00 1.90 532.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/6/2012 Conference call; team meeting; research; calls and
emails re: ongoing projects; call with Tom Jones;
emails and calls re: same.
650.00 7.50 4,875.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/6/2012 Conference call and team meetings 280.00 1.70 476.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/6/2012 Reorganize statement of uncontested facts for Pre 400.00 7.00 2,800.00
Trial Order.
Yellin, D Associate 9/6/2012 P/c w/ M. de Leeuw, I. David, E. Sollie, J. Loffler, and
co-counsel re: trial prep; revise pre-trial order.
280.00 6.60 1,848.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/7/2012 Calls and emails re: proposed injunction language;
emails and calls re: documents; review documents;
conference call.
650.00 5.00 3,250.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/7/2012 Reviewing pre-trial order; discussing matter with E.
Sollie and D. Yellin
280.00 0.60 168.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/7/2012 Work on pre trial order. Work on statement of
uncontested facts. Calls with team.
400.00 5.00 2,000.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/7/2012 Revise facts for PTO. 280.00 4.50 1,260.00
Chan, J Lit.Sup. 9/7/2012 Copying native files from thumb drive to server using
Robocopy. Importing natives into LAW and running
batch processing.
180.00 3.50 630.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/8/2012 Review draft injunction and consent decrees from
other jurisdictions.
650.00 2.10 1,365.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/8/2012 Read DHH deposition transcripts; review draft
injunction and e-mails from S. Brannon.
280.00 3.80 1,064.00
Chan, J Lit.Sup. 9/8/2012 Manually tiffing out documents that failed automated
processing.
180.00 3.00 540.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/9/2012 Review documents, briefs, drafts, and
correspondence.
650.00 1.40 910.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/9/2012 Review deposition transcripts. 280.00 1.00 280.00
Chan, J Lit.Sup. 9/9/2012 Exporting as single page tiff images and loading to
new concordance database.
180.00 0.90 162.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/10/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: scheduling and
negotiations; review documents; review deposition
transcripts.
650.00 4.00 2,600.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/10/2012 Editing and coordinating filing of pro hac for E. Sollie;
editing/researching facts section for order of proof
and pre-trial order.
280.00 3.30 924.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/10/2012 Prepare for depositions. Work on pre trial order. 400.00 6.00 2,400.00
Page 4 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
Yellin, D Associate 9/10/2012 Conf. call w/ co-counsel; review citations in draft
PTO; review documents on concordance; conf. w/ J.
Loffler & E. Sollie.
280.00 3.50 980.00
Chan, J Lit.Sup. 9/10/2012 Exporting fies as single page tiff images with
Concordance load files. Loading into Concordance
for review.
180.00 1.50 270.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/11/2012 Mulitple calls and emails re: status, scheduling, trial
strategy, pre-trial order.
650.00 5.40 3,510.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/11/2012 Editing/updating the order of proof and pre-trial
order; e-mail correspondence with team regarding
the PTO; review of statements of undisputed
material facts.
280.00 5.20 1,456.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/11/2012 Prepare for depositions. Work on pre trial order. 400.00 7.40 2,960.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/11/2012 Conf. w/ J. Loffler & E. Sollie; revise facts for PTO;
read deposition transcripts.
280.00 6.30 1,764.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/12/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: list of ongoing
violations/past violations; pre-trial order; emails with
counsel for SoS.
650.00 5.60 3,640.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/12/2012 Fact section for pre-trial order; hard copies of
exhibits and index for production to opposing
counsel.
280.00 2.70 756.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/12/2012 Prepare for deposition. 400.00 2.70 1,080.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/12/2012 Travel to New Orleans [6 hours travel time @ 50%
lodestar rate].
200.00 6.00 1,200.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/12/2012 Work on PTO, conf. w/ J. Loffler; work on
documents; review depositions
280.00 2.80 784.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/13/2012 Review depositions and exhibits for pretrial order.
Multiple calls and emails re: same.
650.00 4.30 2,795.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/13/2012 Pulling together and cross-checking final exhibit list
and printed exhibits for completeness and accuracy
for production to opposing counsel.
280.00 3.50 980.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/13/2012 Take depositions of Y. Ash and S. Banks. 400.00 8.00 3,200.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/13/2012 Travel back to NYC [6 hours travel time]. 200.00 6.00 1,200.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/13/2012 Review and prepare exhibits to ship to defendants. 280.00 7.10 1,988.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/14/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: status; review
depositions for pretrial conference.
650.00 4.50 2,925.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/14/2012 E-mail correspondence; meeting with team;
conference call; finalizing and shipping exhibit books
to opposing counsel.
280.00 1.40 392.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/14/2012 Work on pre trial order. Work on getting copies of
exhibits to all defendants. Call with co-counsel.
400.00 4.40 1,760.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/14/2012 Work on trial exhibits. 280.00 5.00 1,400.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/16/2012 Review documents; multiple emails and calls re:
same.
650.00 4.00 2,600.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/16/2012 Review SOS exhibits and draft objections. 280.00 3.50 980.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/17/2012 Review defendants' exhibits' emails and calls re:
same.
650.00 7.50 4,875.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/17/2012 Drafting and editing pretrial order; proofing and
sending pretrial order to opposing counsel;
coordinating with lit support on concordance and ftp
exhibits; reviewing exhibits and pre-trial order inserts
from defendants.
280.00 9.70 2,716.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/17/2012 Review and compile changes to draft PTO; e-mails
w/ team; review exhibits and revisions to PTO.
280.00 3.80 1,064.00
Chan, J Lit.Sup. 9/17/2012 Importing natives into LAW for batch processing.
Exporting as single page tiff images and loading to
Concordance for review.
180.00 1.50 270.00
Page 5 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/18/2012 Attention to meet and confer and pretrial order;
multiple calls and emails re: same; review
depositions.
650.00 7.00 4,550.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/18/2012 Status call with E. Sollie 280.00 0.20 56.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/18/2012 Prepare for meet and confer. 400.00 3.90 1,560.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/18/2012 Draft opposition to Motion for Status; conf. call w/
team; conf. w/ E. Sollie; review SOS exhibits.
280.00 10.80 3,024.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/19/2012 Multiple calls and emails re: pretrial order; prepare
for call; meeting.
650.00 7.50 4,875.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/19/2012 Pre-trial order edits/review; objections to list of
exhibits of defendants; supplemental exhibits for
plaintiffs; coordinating with lit support to share with
other counsel.
280.00 5.60 1,568.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/19/2012 Prepare for meet and confer. Calls with co-counsel. 400.00 4.30 1,720.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/19/2012 Conf. call w/ team; p/c w/ J. Loffler, N. Korgaonkar, &
R. Wilson; Review objections and PTO inserts.
280.00 4.20 1,176.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/20/2012 Prepare for meet and confer; meet and confer; team
meetings and calls; review revisions.
650.00 10.00 6,500.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/20/2012 Meet and confer with defendants regarding pre-trial
order; making edits and changes to pre-trial order
and exhibit lists.
280.00 11.40 3,192.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/20/2012 Pre-trial meet-and-confer, conf. w' co-counsel re:
same; revise fact sections of pre-trial order.
280.00 11.10 3,108.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/21/2012 Review revisions to pretrial order; attention to pretrial
order and communcations re: same.
650.00 4.00 2,600.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/21/2012 Turning all parties edits to pre-trial order; finalizing
updated PTO and exhibit list with objections.
280.00 7.50 2,100.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/21/2012 Work on pre trial order. 400.00 7.20 2,880.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/21/2012 Revise and circulate PTO; conf. call w/ co-counsel. 280.00 5.40 1,512.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/22/2012 Attention to pretrial order and related matters and
communications.
650.00 4.30 2,795.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/22/2012 Review comments on PTO; e-mails w/ co-counsel. 280.00 1.50 420.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/23/2012 Attention to pretrial order and related matters and
communications.
650.00 4.70 3,055.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/23/2012 Revisions to PTO; e-mails w/ co-counsel. 280.00 5.20 1,456.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/24/2012 Review and revise pretrial order; multiple calls and
emails re: same; multiple conference calls re: same.
650.00 7.60 4,940.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/24/2012 Editing pre-trial order; finalizing and proofing the pre-
trial order; e-mail and phone correspondence with co-
counsel and team; drafting and editing letter to
judge; coordinating filing with MAO.
280.00 7.80 2,184.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/24/2012 Filing pre-trial order. Editing pre trial order. Calls with
opposing counsel regarding pre trial order. Call with
co counsel regarding pre trial order.
400.00 7.20 2,880.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/24/2012 Review, revise, and finalize Pre-Trial Order; conf. call
w/ team.
280.00 5.40 1,512.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/25/2012 Calls and emails re: DCFS motion for a continuance;
multiple calls and emails re: scheduling and strategy;
review final version of pretrial order; call re: same.
650.00 7.00 4,550.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/25/2012 Reviewing proposed findings of fact; coordinate with
paralegal on exhibit list and closing binder/flash drive
for judge; correspondence with team regarding order
of proof; witnesses; and pre-trial order.
280.00 2.60 728.00
Page 6 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
Sollie, E Associate 9/25/2012 Call with co counsel regarding pre trial order and
next steps. Work on motions in limine.
400.00 4.30 1,720.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/25/2012 Conf. call w/ team; research on sanctions and
contested facts in PTO.
280.00 3.90 1,092.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/26/2012 Prepare for Louisiana trip; multiple calls and emails;
review draft documents.
650.00 6.00 3,900.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/26/2012 Conference call with team on witnesses, order of
proof, and deliverables; editing witness chart; e-mail
correspondence with co-counsel.
280.00 2.50 700.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/26/2012 E-mails w/ team; research re: admissibility of
statements of facts at trial.
280.00 1.50 420.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/27/2012 Team meeting; court hearing; meeting; review
documents and depositions.
650.00 9.50 6,175.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/27/2012 Travel to New Orleans [6 hours travel time @ 50%
lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/27/2012 Editing proposed conclusions of law; meeting with D.
Yellin and E. Sollie; call with E. Sollie to discuss
matter; reviewing proposed injunction and findings of
fact outlines.
280.00 3.10 868.00
Sollie, E Associate 9/27/2012 Calls with co counsel. Drafting motions in limine.
reviewing various documents.
400.00 6.10 2,440.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/27/2012 Draft motions in limine; p/c w/ E. Sollie; Conf. w/ E.
Sollie & J. Loffler; prepare for trial.
280.00 6.60 1,848.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/28/2012 Mulitple calls and emails; review proposed
conclusions of law; review depositions.
650.00 4.10 2,665.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/28/2012 Draft Motions in Limine; conf. w/ team. 280.00 5.20 1,456.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/29/2012 Review and revise conclusions of law; review and
revise motions in limine.
650.00 4.00 2,600.00
Yellin, D Associate 9/29/2012 Review and revise Motions in Limine; review Draft
Injunction; attention to e-mails from team.
280.00 3.80 1,064.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 9/30/2012 Review depositions; review and revise motions in
limine; emails re: scheduling.
650.00 1.70 1,105.00
Loffler, J Associate 9/30/2012 Gathering replacement exhibits for inclusion on flash
drive for counsel and judge.
280.00 0.50 140.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/1/2012 Prepare for meet and confer; meet and confer;
multiple calls and emails re: same.
650.00 8.60 5,590.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/1/2012 Reviewing and editing proposed findings of fact;
meet-and-confer conference call and team meeting;
booking travel for team members for trial.
280.00 6.20 1,736.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/1/2012 Draft MIL; meet and confer w/ opposing counsel;
conf. w/ team.
280.00 6.20 1,736.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/2/2012 Attention to pre-trial order; review transcripts and
scripts; multiple calls and emails.
650.00 6.00 3,900.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/2/2012 Conference call with co-counsel; drafting and editing
motions in limine and oppositions; reviewing
depositions for cross-examination scripts; drafting
cross-examination scripts.
280.00 6.60 1,848.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/2/2012 Preparations for trial. 400.00 3.00 1,200.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/2/2012 Conf. w/ team re: trial prep; review and revise fact
sections of pre-trial order.
280.00 6.40 1,792.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/3/2012 Trial prep and attention to PTO. 650.00 8.00 5,200.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/3/2012 E-mail correspondence with co-counsel; drafting and
editing motions in limine and oppositions; editing pre-
trial order; creating trial exhibit list for flash drives.
280.00 10.60 2,968.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/3/2012 Work on revised pre trial order. Work on cross
examination scripts. Work on motions in limine.
400.00 6.90 2,760.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/3/2012 Revise PTO; e-mails w/ team re: same. 280.00 4.80 1,344.00
Page 7 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/4/2012 Trial preparation and attention to PTO. 650.00 6.00 3,900.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/4/2012 Cross-checking exhibits and ensuring flash drives
are accurate and complete; mailing flash drives of
exhibits to judge and all parties; e-mail
correspondence with co-counsel re: pre-trial order.
280.00 4.10 1,148.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/4/2012 Work on Amended Pre-Trial Order. Reading
depositions. Work on sending out all exhibits to
Judge Milazzo via fed ex.
400.00 4.50 1,800.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/4/2012 Revise pre-trial order; review Rogers deposition. 280.00 5.20 1,456.00
Chan, J Lit.Sup. 10/4/2012 Burning flash drives and DVDs of required
documentation.
180.00 2.00 360.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/5/2012 Trial prep; call with team. 650.00 7.00 4,550.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/5/2012 Conference call with team; e-mail correspondence in
connection with filing PTO and findings of fact; e-
mail correspondence and phone call with trial tech
provider.
280.00 0.90 252.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/5/2012 Work on direct/cross scripts. Work on motions in
limine. Work on filing the Amended Pre Trial Order.
400.00 7.30 2,920.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/5/2012 Review and revise pre-trial order; work on motions in
limine; conf. w/ team; review Rogers deposition.
280.00 4.80 1,344.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/6/2012 Calls and emails re: evidentiary issues and Motions
in Limine.
650.00 3.50 2,275.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/6/2012 Read Rogers deposition; draft examination
questions.
280.00 7.90 2,212.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/7/2012 Calls and emails re: evidentiary issues and Motions
in Limine; trial prep.
650.00 4.80 3,120.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/7/2012 Drafting cross examination scripts; reviewing
depositions.
280.00 1.50 420.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/7/2012 Work on cross and direct scripts. Editing motions in
limine.
400.00 5.40 2,160.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/7/2012 Review and revise Rogers direct and cross
questions; e-mails w/ team; read Banks deposition.
280.00 6.20 1,736.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/8/2012 Trial Prep. 650.00 9.00 5,850.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/8/2012 Drafting cross-examination scripts; conference call
and e-mail correspondence with team and co-
counsel; drafting pro hac admission motions for D.
Yellin and J. Loffler; drafting, editing, finalizing, and
filing motions in limine, memos of law, notices, and
proposed orders.
280.00 14.70 4,116.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/8/2012 Preparing and filing Motions in Limine. Work on
direct and cross scripts. Calls with co-counsel.
400.00 10.40 4,160.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/8/2012 Review S. Banks deposition; draft Banks cross;
Conf. call w/ team.
280.00 6.20 1,736.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/9/2012 Trial prep. 650.00 8.50 5,525.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/9/2012 Drafting cross examination scripts; finalizing pro hac
forms for filing.
280.00 2.40 672.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/9/2012 Work on cross examination script. Edit response to
Defendant's motion in limine. Call with co-counsel.
Meeting with M. De Leeuw regarding case. Meetings
with J. Loffler and D. Yellin regarding assignments.
400.00 8.00 3,200.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/9/2012 Conf. w/ team; draft opposition for motions in limine;
p/c w/ N. Korgaonkar.
280.00 9.20 2,576.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/10/2012 Trial prep. 650.00 9.00 5,850.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/10/2012 Cross-examination scripts; discussion with M. de
Leeuw; call with trial tech person; drafting/editing and
filing supplemental filings to witness list.
280.00 7.00 1,960.00
Page 8 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
Sollie, E Associate 10/10/2012 Work on cross/direct scripts. Call with co-counsel
regarding proposed SOS stipulation and other
issues. Work on filing witness list and depositions.
Editing responses to motions in limine.
400.00 6.30 2,520.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/10/2012 Draft opposition to judicial notice motion; conf. call w/
team; p/c w. N. Korgaonkar re: Exhibits; review
exhibits for binders; revise opposition papers.
280.00 6.10 1,708.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/11/2012 Trial prep; meeting ;review and revise scripts. 650.00 10.00 6,500.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/11/2012 Drafting/editing cross examination scripts; mooting
cross examination scripts with trial team; creating
demonstratives.
280.00 9.80 2,744.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/11/2012 Trial prep 400.00 11.70 4,680.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/11/2012 Witness prep for trial; revise oppositions to Schedler
motions in limine; revise witness scripts; e-mails and
p/cs w/ team; prepare W. Young subpoena; arrange
exhibit binders.
280.00 13.80 3,864.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/12/2012 Trial Prep. 650.00 8.00 5,200.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/12/2012 Creating demonstratives; cross examination scripts;
binders for trial; shipping everything to Louisiana.
280.00 9.90 2,772.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/12/2012 Trial prep. Draft scripts. Get exhibit binders. Send
exhibit binders. Call with co counsel .
400.00 7.10 2,840.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/12/2012 Arrange binders of trial exhibits; revise Rogers and
Banks scripts; p/c w/ team; arrange exhibits and
other trial materials; trial prep.
280.00 9.20 2,576.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/13/2012 Trial prep. 650.00 6.00 3,900.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/13/2012 Meeting with trial team in preparation for arguments. 280.00 1.50 420.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/13/2012 Trial preparation including motion arguments and
exhibits.
280.00 2.60 728.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/13/2012 Travel to New Orleans for trial [6 hours travel time @
50% lodestar rate].
140.00 6.00 840.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/13/2012 Trial prep. 400.00 4.60 1,840.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/13/2012 Travel to New Orleans [6 hours travel time @ 50%
lodestar rate].
200.00 6.00 1,200.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/13/2012 Meet w/ team re: motions in limine and trial
preparations.
280.00 4.60 1,288.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/13/2012 Fly to New Orleans for trial [6 hours travel time @
50% lodestar rate].
140.00 6.00 840.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/14/2012 Prepare for trial. 650.00 11.00 7,150.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/14/2012 Travel to New Orleans [6 hours travel time @ 50%
lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/14/2012 Trial preparation; meetings with team; argument
mooting
280.00 10.50 2,940.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/14/2012 Trial prep. 400.00 11.50 4,600.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/14/2012 Prepare for trial; review and rehearse oral argument. 280.00 9.70 2,716.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/15/2012 Trial, prepare for day two. 650.00 16.00 10,400.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/15/2012 At trial and preparation for next day after recess 280.00 16.00 4,480.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/15/2012 Trial 400.00 16.00 6,400.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/15/2012 Trial and work re: same. 280.00 15.80 4,424.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/16/2012 Trial; prepare for Day 3. 650.00 14.50 9,425.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/16/2012 At trial and preparation for next day; closing
demonstratives
280.00 13.80 3,864.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/16/2012 Trial prep strategy discussion for next day of trial,
and mooting.
280.00 1.00 280.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/16/2012 Trial 400.00 14.80 5,920.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/16/2012 Trial and work re: same. 280.00 14.30 4,004.00
Page 9 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
David, I Partner 10/17/2012 Attend trial; review trial materials. 650.00 6.50 4,225.00
David, I Partner 10/17/2012 Travel from NYC to New Orleans [6 hours travel time
@ 50% lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/17/2012 Trial; post trial meetings. 650.00 9.00 5,850.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/17/2012 At trial and concluding work after adjournment 280.00 7.30 2,044.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/17/2012 Trial 400.00 8.30 3,320.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/17/2012 Trial. 280.00 7.30 2,044.00
David, I Partner 10/18/2012 Review trial materials. 650.00 2.80 1,820.00
David, I Partner 10/18/2012 Travel from New Orleans to NYC [6 hours travel time
@ 50% lodestar rate].
325.00 6.00 1,950.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/18/2012 Post-trial meetings; mutliple calls and emails. 650.00 5.00 3,250.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/18/2012 Breaking down war room and sending all materials
back to firm; shredding attorney work product no
longer needed
280.00 2.00 560.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/18/2012 Break down co cousel's office. Ship things back to
FF.
400.00 3.20 1,280.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/18/2012 Disassemble trial materials and ship to NY; clean
trial war room.
280.00 2.50 700.00
David, I Partner 10/19/2012 Review trial materials. 650.00 3.90 2,535.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/19/2012 Research; multiple calls and emails. 650.00 2.50 1,625.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/19/2012 Return travel to NYC [7 hours travel time @ 50%
lodestar rate].
325.00 7.00 2,275.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/19/2012 Returning from trial - hotel to home [8.6 hours travel
time @ 50% lodestar rate].
140.00 8.60 1,204.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/19/2012 Travel [7.7 hours travel time @ 50% lodestar rate]. 200.00 7.70 1,540.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/19/2012 Flight to NY from New Orleans. [7 hours travel time] 140.00 7.00 980.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/22/2012 Review and revise motion; filing; multiple calls and
emails re: trial-related matters.
650.00 5.50 3,575.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/22/2012 Meeting with D. Yellin and E. Sollie; e-mail
correspondence to/from co-counsel.
280.00 0.40 112.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/22/2012 Review and revise motion to admit facts; research on
standing; draft e-mail to opp. counsel re: caption;
review and organize case materials.
280.00 5.70 1,596.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/23/2012 Review updated draft; calls and emails re: post-trial
briefing; research.
650.00 3.30 2,145.00
Sollie, E Associate 10/23/2012 Editing and drafting standing section of post trial
brief.
400.00 2.10 840.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/23/2012 Draft portion of post-trial brief; review brief on
admissibility of fact statements; e-mails w/ team;
research on standing.
280.00 6.30 1,764.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/24/2012 Reviewing standing section of post-trial brief 280.00 0.40 112.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/24/2012 Review and revise standing portion of post-trial brief;
e-mails w/ team re: motion to admit pleadings.
280.00 3.20 896.00
David, I Partner 10/25/2012 Review portion of transcripts. 650.00 2.00 1,300.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/25/2012 Attention to post-trial filings. 650.00 1.80 1,170.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/25/2012 Review of standing section in post-trial brief; email
correspondence regarding the same; discussion with
M. de Leeuw, and e-mail correspondence, regarding
invoicing amongst co-counsel.
280.00 0.50 140.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/25/2012 Review and revise motion to admit Defendants'
SMFs.
280.00 1.10 308.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/26/2012 Attention to post-trial filings. 650.00 2.20 1,430.00
Loffler, J Associate 10/26/2012 E-mail correspondence with team and court reporter. 280.00 0.20 56.00
Yellin, D Associate 10/26/2012 Revise and file memorandum re: motion to admit
Defendants SMF.
280.00 1.80 504.00
Page 10 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
Yellin, D Associate 10/29/2012 E-mails w/ team; research and e-mail re: motion to
change caption.
280.00 1.60 448.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/30/2012 Attention to post-trial briefing. 650.00 1.50 975.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 10/31/2012 Attention to post-trial briefing. 650.00 2.00 1,300.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/4/2012 Multiple emails and calls re: exchange of information;
review same.
650.00 1.30 845.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/5/2012 Calls and emails re: post trial briefing and disclosure
of information to defendants.
650.00 4.00 2,600.00
Sollie, E Associate 11/5/2012 Editing post trial brief. 400.00 1.50 600.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/5/2012 Draft motion to amend caption; e-mails w/ team;
review post-trial brief draft.
280.00 1.70 476.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/6/2012 Review and revise brief; review cases on standing;
multiple calls and emails.
650.00 3.50 2,275.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/6/2012 Review and revise post-trial brief; revise motion to
amend caption.
280.00 2.40 672.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/7/2012 Research; calls and emails re: post-trial briefing and
related issues; review transcripts.
650.00 3.40 2,210.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/7/2012 Circulate motion to amend caption; e-mails w/ team. 280.00 0.20 56.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/8/2012 Conference call; follow up; review research;
comments on briefs; calls and emails Dale Ho.
650.00 3.50 2,275.00
Loffler, J Associate 11/8/2012 Conference call with co-counsel; review of research
on points raised in call; e-mail correspondence with
co-counsel after the call.
280.00 2.20 616.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/8/2012 Conf. call w/ team; e-mails w/ opposing counsel re:
motion to amend caption.
280.00 2.20 616.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/9/2012 Emails and calls re: filing status; research;. 650.00 3.40 2,210.00
Loffler, J Associate 11/9/2012 E-mail correspondence with Court Reporter re: errata
sheets and trial transcripts; e-mail correspondence
with J. Boros regarding invoice for trial tech services.
280.00 0.40 112.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/9/2012 E-mails w/ opp. counsel and team re: motion to
amend caption.
280.00 0.90 252.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/12/2012 Emails and calls re: post-trial matters. 650.00 1.10 715.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/13/2012 Review and revise post-trial brief; finalize motion to
amend caption and motion to expedite same and
send to MAO for filing.
280.00 2.40 672.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/14/2012 Calls and emails re: post-trial issues. 650.00 2.00 1,300.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/14/2012 E-mails w/ team re: motion to amend caption and
post-trial brief.
280.00 0.10 28.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/15/2012 Conference call; review issues; research; review post-
trial briefing.
650.00 3.00 1,950.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/15/2012 Conf. call w/ team. 280.00 0.60 168.00
11/16/2012 E-mails re: Boros invoice. 280.00 0.10 28.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/19/2012 Review post-trial memoranda; calls and emails re:
same; filing issues.
650.00 4.50 2,925.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/19/2012 E-mails re: post-trial briefs. 280.00 0.10 28.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/20/2012 Calls and emails re: post-trial briefs; review same. 650.00 2.00 1,300.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/20/2012 Review SOS Opp. to Motion to Amend Captions; e-
mails w/ team.
280.00 0.30 84.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/26/2012 calls and emails re: responsive post-trial filing;
research; call Borek; review transcripts.
650.00 2.80 1,820.00
Loffler, J Associate 11/27/2012 Following up with assistant and accounting re:
invoice for court reporter; reviewing e-mail from co-
counsel.
280.00 0.40 112.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/27/2012 Review D's motion to exclude; e-mails re: same. 280.00 0.20 56.00
Loffler, J Associate 11/28/2012 Conference call with co-counsel 280.00 0.90 252.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/28/2012 Call re: D's motion to exclude. 280.00 1.00 280.00
Page 11 of 12
Yellin, D Associate
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Attorneys' Fees
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
Attorney Position Work Date Description Hourly Rate Hours Amount
Exhibit A
de Leeuw, M Partner 11/30/2012 Conference call. 650.00 0.80 520.00
Yellin, D Associate 11/30/2012 Review opp. to D's objections; e-mails re: same. 280.00 0.40 112.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 12/3/2012 Review order; calls and emails; review response re:
additional evidence.
650.00 2.20 1,430.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 12/4/2012 Review case file; attention to trial expenses;
attention to personal file for appeal purposes; calls
and emails.
650.00 2.40 1,560.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 1/23/2013 Read decision; multiple calls and emails re: same;
conference call; draft and revise press release and
firm announcement language.
650.00 5.00 3,250.00
Loffler, J Associate 1/23/2013 Reading decision; conference call with co-counsel;
reviewing press release on litigation victory
280.00 1.30 364.00
Yellin, D Associate 1/23/2013 Review FOF, COL, and Injunction; conf. call w/ team. 280.00 1.60 448.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 1/24/2013 Multiple calls and emails re: decision; review and
revise press release; draft internal memos;
conference call.
650.00 4.20 2,730.00
Yellin, D Associate 1/24/2013 Review e-mails re: press release. 280.00 0.20 56.00
de Leeuw, M Partner 1/25/2013 Review billing record; review time; calls re: same. 650.00 2.00 1,300.00
Yellin, D Associate 1/25/2013 Review press release. 280.00 0.10 28.00
Total 1,555.40 627,345.00$
Page 12 of 12
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-13 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 12
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Costs & Expenses (by Category, by Date)
Pro Bono/Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP
TELEPHONE/TELECONFERENCING/INTERNET
Date Name Amount Description
8/1/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 4.37$ Teleconferencing Expense - 4:56pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
8/8/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 14.23$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:28pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
8/8/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 7.40$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:28pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
8/14/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 7.79$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:28pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
8/21/2012 David Yellin 13.32$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:39pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
8/28/2012 Erica Sollie 11.61$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:29pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
8/31/2012 Erica Sollie 9.63$ Teleconferencing Expense - 2:58pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/3/2012 David Yellin 53.66$ Teleconferencing Expense - 10:57am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/4/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 12.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Internet Access at Hotel stay in New
Orleans for court hearing.
9/5/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 9.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - In-flight internet service - Travel to New
Orleans, LA to attend Court hearing.
9/7/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 2.91$ Teleconferencing Expense - 10:45am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/7/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 4.31$ Teleconferencing Expense - 11:19am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/10/2012 David Yellin 5.96$ Teleconferencing Expense - 2:42pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/11/2012 Erica Sollie 11.67$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:00pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/18/2012 David Yellin 12.21$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:29pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/19/2012 David Yellin 16.32$ Teleconferencing Expense - 10:59am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/20/2012 Erica Sollie 69.76$ Teleconferencing Expense - 11:55am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/25/2012 David Yellin 14.30$ Teleconferencing Expense - 12:13pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
9/27/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 12.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Internet Access at Hotel stay in New
Orleans for court hearing.
10/1/2012 David Yellin 6.83$ Teleconferencing Expense - 1:58pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
10/5/2012 David Yellin 2.66$ Teleconferencing Expense - 11:28am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
10/5/2012 David Yellin 6.07$ Teleconferencing Expense - 11:33am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
10/8/2012 David Yellin 20.93$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:28pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
10/10/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 11.54$ Teleconferencing Expense - 3:27pm MyConference Audio - Toll Free
10/13/2012 David Yellin 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Telecommunications charge in hotel.
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Travel to New Orleans for Trial.
10/14/2012 David Yellin 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Telecommunications charge in hotel.
10/14/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Travel to New Orleans, LA for trial - Hotel
stay at the JW Marriott.
10/14/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 9.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Travel to New Orleans, LA for trial - In-
flight Internet Access.
10/15/2012 David Yellin 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Telecommunications charge in hotel.
10/15/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Travel to New Orleans, LA for trial - Hotel
stay at the JW Marriott - Internet.
10/16/2012 David Yellin 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Telecommunications charge in hotel.
Exhibit B
Page 1 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 10
Exhibit B
10/16/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Telecommunications charge in hotel.
10/17/2012 David Yellin 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Telecommunications charge in hotel.
10/17/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 14.95$ Telephone Phone/ Internet Expense - Telecommunications charge in hotel.
11/15/2012 David Yellin 2.94$ Teleconferencing Expense - 11:25am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
11/15/2012 David Yellin 11.82$ Teleconferencing Expense - 11:32am MyConference Audio - Toll Free
Subtotal $ 517.54
DUPLICATING
Date Name Amount Description
8/27/2012 David Yellin 7.44$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120823 To: 20120823)
8/27/2012 Elizabeth Holmok 68.04$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120820 To: 20120820)
9/23/2012 Erica Sollie 189.00$ Duplicating / Spiral (From: 20120921 To: 20120921)
9/23/2012 Elizabeth Holmok 81.00$ Duplicating / Spiral (From: 20120917 To: 20120917)
9/23/2012 Erica Sollie 216.90$ Duplicating / Tabs (From: 20120921 To: 20120921)
9/23/2012 Elizabeth Holmok 67.20$ Duplicating / Tabs (From: 20120917 To: 20120917)
9/23/2012 Erica Sollie 5,809.56$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120917 To: 20120920)
9/23/2012 Elizabeth Holmok 308.40$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120920 To: 20120920)
9/23/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 75.36$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120904 To: 20120904)
9/23/2012 Erica Sollie 63.00$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120911 To: 20120911)
9/23/2012 Israel David 2.40$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120916 To: 20120916)
9/23/2012 David Yellin 10.80$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120913 To: 20120913)
9/23/2012 Elizabeth Holmok 2,302.20$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120911 To: 20120914)
9/30/2012 Filipina Balahadia 25.00$ Duplicating / CD Copy (From: 20120927 To: 20120927)
9/30/2012 Filipina Balahadia 324.24$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120927 To: 20120927)
9/30/2012 Filipina Balahadia 0.36$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20120925 To: 20120925)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 0.36$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121005 To: 20121005)
10/26/2012 Patrick Foote 9.12$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121003 To: 20121003)
10/26/2012 Elizabeth Holmok 87.84$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121005 To: 20121005)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 42.00$ Duplicating / 3 inch Binder (From: 20121012 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 31.80$ Duplicating / Tabs (From: 20121012 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 60.00$ Duplicating / Regular Binders (From: 20121012 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Amanda Russo 12.48$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121012 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 1,455.24$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121011 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 David Yellin 967.08$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121011 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Jessica Gonsowski 1.68$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121012 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Filipina Balahadia 441.12$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121012 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Elizabeth Holmok 495.84$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121011 To: 20121012)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 175.00$ Duplicating / CD Copy (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 David Yellin 200.00$ Duplicating / CD Copy (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 5.95$ Duplicating / Tabs (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 David Yellin 35.40$ Duplicating / Tabs (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 Filipina Balahadia 7.50$ Duplicating / Tabs (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 David Yellin 0.25$ Duplicating / spstock (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 Erica Sollie 63.00$ Duplicating / Regular Binders (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 David Yellin 144.00$ Duplicating / Regular Binders (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
10/26/2012 Filipina Balahadia 15.00$ Duplicating / Regular Binders (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
Page 2 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 10
Exhibit B
10/26/2012 David Yellin 29.40$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121016 To: 20121016)
12/31/2012 Amanda Russo 0.36$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121203 To: 20121203)
12/31/2012 Joyce Epstein 0.12$ Duplicating / Standard Copies (From: 20121128 To: 20121128)
Subtotal 13,831.44$
MEALS
Date Name Amount Description
8/30/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 51.15$ Chargeable Meals - Dining Room - Internal Meeting - Video Conference
8/30/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 65.32$ Chargeable Meals - Dining Room - Internal Meeting - Video Conference
9/4/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 332.77$ Meals out of town - Attend Court hearing in New Orleans, LA - Dinner with
members of the NAACP-LDF.
9/5/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 184.75$ Meals out of town - Lunch for team while attending hearing in New Orleans, LA.
9/5/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 48.36$ Meals out of town Meals - In-Room Dining - Hotel stay while in New Orleans, LA
for court hearing.
9/12/2012 Erica Sollie 30.10$ Meals out of town - Breakfast before deposition.
9/13/2012 Erica Sollie 44.71$ Meals out of town - Lunch on deposition trip; Luke.
9/20/2012 New York Office 103.43$ Chargeable Meals - Dining Room - Meet and Confer
9/20/2012 New York Office 244.96$ Chargeable Meals - Dining Room - Meet and Confer
9/27/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 295.32$ Meals out of town - Dinner with team with various NAACP reps while attending
hearing in New Orleans, LA.
10/11/2012 New York Office 108.87$ Chargeable Meals - Dining Room - Sollie, Erica
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 15.80$ Meals out of town - Travel to New Orleans for Trial
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 72.80$ Meals out of town - Trip to New Orleans for Trial.
10/13/2012 Jesse Loffler 87.80$ Meals out of town - Dinner re trial prep & trial.
10/13/2012 Jesse Loffler 31.72$ Meals - Local - Meal at airport re trial prep & trial.
10/13/2012 David Yellin 87.80$ Meals out of town - Dinner during trial in New Orleans.
10/14/2012 David Yellin 91.64$ Meals out of town - Dinner on trip to New Orleans for case.
10/14/2012 Jesse Loffler 58.45$ Meals out of town - Breakfast re trial prep & trial
10/15/2012 David Yellin 13.82$ Meals out of town - Lunch during trial in New Orleans
10/15/2012 Erica Sollie 14.00$ Meals out of town - Trip to New Orleans for Trial
10/15/2012 Jesse Loffler 31.47$ Meals out of town - Breakfast re trial prep & trial
10/15/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 19.12$ Meals out of town - Travel to New Orleans, LA for trial - Hotel stay at the JW
Marriott - Room Service Breakfast.
10/15/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 23.16$ Meals - Local - Travel to New Orleans, LA for trial - Dinner; LaGuardia Airport
Café.
10/15/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 866.55$ Meals out of town - Travel to New Orleans, LA for trial - Dinner with Team
10/16/2012 David Yellin 11.54$ Meals out of town - Lunch during trial in New Orleans
10/16/2012 Erica Sollie 11.92$ Meals out of town - Trip to New Orleans for Trial.
10/16/2012 Jesse Loffler 13.34$ Meals out of town - Lunch re trial prep & trial.
10/16/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 15.83$ Meals out of town - Room Service Breakfast; JW Marriott
10/16/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 480.00$ Meals out of town - Dinner with team.
10/17/2012 Erica Sollie 11.97$ Meals out of town - Lunch during trial in New Orleans
10/17/2012 David Yellin 25.92$ Meals out of town - Lunch during trial in New Orleans
10/17/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 5.61$ Meals out of town - Room Service Breakfast; JW Marriott
10/17/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 350.00$ Meals out of town - Dinner with counsel team
10/17/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 80.10$ Meals out of town - Drinks with counsel team
10/18/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 413.21$ Meals out of town - Breakfast with counsel team
10/18/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 500.00$ Meals out of town - Dinner with counsel team
Page 3 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 10
Exhibit B
10/18/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 5.61$ Meals out of town - Room Service Breakfast - JW Marriott
10/19/2012 David Yellin 15.64$ Meals out of town - Breakfast on trip to New Orleans for trial.
10/19/2012 Erica Sollie 17.02$ Meals out of town - Breakfast on trip to New Orleans for trial.
10/19/2012 Jesse Loffler 19.48$ Meals out of town - Breakfast on trip to New Orleans for trial.
Subtotal 4,901.06$
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION (TAXIS)
Date Name Amount Description
8/28/2012 Erica Sollie 32.19$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/14/12 - 1-NEW YORK P-
MANHATTAN 25-W 13 ST-MANHATTAN 11:35PM Sollie, Erica
9/4/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/20/12 10:15PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
9/4/2012 Jesse Loffler 106.90$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/15/12 11:22PM Loffler, Jesse 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN -WAYNE
9/4/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 99.66$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/16/12 02:00AM de Leeuw,
Michael 1-NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN - GLEN RIDGE
9/4/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/15/12 11:14PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
9/4/2012 Israel David 39.00$ Local Transportation - Parking at LaGuardia Airport for trip to New Orleans
9/4/2012 Israel David 25.00$ Local Transportation - Parking at building garage; In-Town
9/11/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/14/12 10:46PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
9/12/2012 Erica Sollie 68.76$ Local Transportation - Taxi from apartment to JFK.
9/12/2012 Erica Sollie 40.56$ Local Transportation - Taxi from JFK to apartment.
9/13/2012 Jesse Loffler 23.00$ Local Transportation - worked late - dispatch car never showed up.
9/20/2012 David Yellin 20.00$ Local Transportation - Work after normal business hours.
9/26/2012 Michael Deguzman 66.16$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/28/12 09:30PM 1-NEW YORK P-
MANHATTAN - JERSEY CITY
10/3/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/10/12 10:10PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
10/3/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/06/12 09:15PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
10/3/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 90.09$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/04/12 11:02AM de Leeuw,
Michael 1-NEW YORK P-NEW YORK - FLUSHING
10/3/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/22/12 10:50PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-E 35 ST-MANHATTAN
10/3/2012 Erica Sollie 32.19$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 08/22/12 11:51PM Sollie, Erica 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 25-W 13 ST-MANHATTAN
10/3/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/05/12 09:25PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-E 35 ST-MANHATTAN
10/10/2012 Jesse Loffler 66.16$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/20/12 11:48PM Loffler, Jesse 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN - JERSEY CITY
10/10/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/18/12 11:40PM Yellin, David 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
10/10/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 23.40$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - Transportation for work on NAACP
matter.
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 53.16$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - Taxi Airport to Apt.
10/16/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 166.96$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/05/12 11:02PM de Leeuw,
Michael FLUSHING - GLEN RIDGE
Page 4 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 10
Exhibit B
10/16/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 93.80$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/04/12 11:11PM de Leeuw,
Michael 1-NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN - GLEN RIDGE
10/13/2012 David Yellin 42.25$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis - Cab to Airport for a case located in New
Orleans, LA (With Erica Sollie).
10/13/2012 Jesse Loffler 74.00$ Local Transportation - Taxi to airport re trial prep & trial.
10/18/2012 Israel David 66.00$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - Garage parking at LaGuardia Airport
re trip to Louisiana.
10/19/2012 Jesse Loffler 121.25$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - cab from airport re trial
10/23/2012 Jesse Loffler 65.65$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway -10/03/12 09:25PM Loffler, Jes 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN - -JERSEY CITY
10/23/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/02/12 11:05PM Yellin, Dav 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
10/23/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 158.72$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 09/27/12 05:37AM DE LEEUW, MI,
- -GLEN RIDGE - -FLUSHING
10/30/2012 Erica Sollie 32.19$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/09/12 12:20AM Sollie, Eri 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 25-WEST 13TH -MANHATTAN
10/30/2012 Erica Sollie 32.19$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/11/12 11:56PM Sollie, Eri 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 25-WEST 13TH -MANHATTAN
10/30/2012 Jesse Loffler 65.65$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/09/12 12:21AM Loffler, Jes 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN - -JERSEY CITY
10/30/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/09/12 10:30PM Yellin, Dav 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
10/30/2012 David Yellin 34.30$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/12/12 12:34AM Yellin, Dav 1-
NEW YORK P-MANHATTAN 240-EAST 35TH -MANHATTAN
12/18/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 187.79$ Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - 10/19/12 11:44AM DE LEEUW, MI,
- -FLUSHING - -GLEN RIDGE
Subtotal 2,269.98$
OUT OF TOWN LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
Date Name Amount Description
9/4/2012 Israel David 42.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi service from airport to hotel
9/5/2012 Israel David 10.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi service from hotel to court.
9/5/2012 Israel David 43.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi service from court to airport.
9/12/2012 Erica Sollie 38.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi Airport to Hotel.
9/13/2012 Erica Sollie 40.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi Hotel to Airport.
9/27/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 14.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Ground transportation while in New Orleans,
LA for court hearing.
9/27/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 38.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Ground transportation while in New Orleans,
LA for court hearing.
9/28/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 38.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Ground transportation while in New Orleans,
LA for court hearing.
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 15.25$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi Hotel to Airport.
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 8.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Trip to New Orleans for Trial.
10/13/2012 Jesse Loffler 10.50$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi re trial prep & trial.
10/13/2012 David Yellin 49.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Cab from airport in New Orleans, LA to hotel
(With J. Loffler and E. Sollie).
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 37.03$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Trip to New Orleans for Trial; 10/13/12.
10/16/2012 Jesse Loffler 17.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation; cab re trial prep & trial; 10/16/12
Page 5 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 10
Exhibit B
10/17/2012 Israel David 7.50$ Out of Town Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - Taxi to court re
Louisiana hearing
10/17/2012 Israel David 8.25$ Out of Town Local Transportation (Taxis) Taxis/Subway - Taxi from court to
office re Louisiana hearing.
10/17/2012 Israel David 42.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation (Taxis/Subway) - Taxi from airport to court re
Louisiana
10/18/2012 Israel David 39.60$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Taxi to airport for return trip to NY
10/19/2012 Jesse Loffler 47.00$ Out of Town Local Transportation - taxi to airport re trial prep & trial
Subtotal 544.13$
OUT OF TOWN LODGING
Date Name Amount Description
9/5/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 226.87$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Hotel stay while in New Orleans, LA for
court hearing. 09/04/2012 - 09/05/2012
9/5/2012 Israel David 283.06$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Hotel stay re: New Orleans re Louisiana
State Conference 09/04/2012 - 09/05/2012
9/12/2012 Erica Sollie 180.67$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Hotel in New Orleans; 09/12/2012 -
9/13/2012
9/28/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 283.37$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Hotel stay while in New Orleans, LA for
court hearing. 09/27/2012 - 09/28/2012
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 2,412.12$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Travel to New Orleans for Trial
10/13/2012 - 10/19/2012.
10/17/2012 David Yellin 1,995.15$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Lodging in New Orleans during trial
(10/13-10/18/2012)
10/18/2012 Israel David 509.37$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Out of Town - Hotel stay re trip to New
Orleans, Louisiana (10/17/2012-10/18/2012)
10/19/2012 Jesse Loffler 2,563.16$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - JWMarriott Hotel in New Orleans for
trial (10/13-10/19/2012)
10/19/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 2,010.10$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Travel to New Orleans, LA for trial - Hotel
stay at the JW Marriott (10/14-10/19/2012)
10/20/2012 David Yellin 416.97$ Out of Town Lodging Accommodation - Hotel at JW Marriott (10/19/2012)
Subtotal 10,880.84$
AIRFARES
Date Name Amount Description
8/31/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 754.92$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7119481705, Origin: LGA, Travel
date: 9/4/2012, Mode: DELTA AIRLINES Destination: MSY - LGA
8/31/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7119481705, Origin: LGA, LGA,
Travel date: 9/4/2012, Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS Destination: MSY - LGA
9/4/2012 Israel David 547.80$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Flight to New Orleans re Louisiana State
Conference Delta # 2332
9/5/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 29.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket Upgrade Fee - Attend Court hearing in
New Orleans, LA.
9/5/2012 Israel David 547.80$ Airfares/ Trains Expense - Flight to New Orleans re Louisiana State Conference
Delta #1470; 09/04/2012 - 09/04/2012
Page 6 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 10
Exhibit B
9/6/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 29.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket Upgrade Fee - Attend Court hearing in
New Orleans, LA.
9/10/2012 Erica Sollie 681.31$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016513, Origin: JFK,Destination:
MSY - LGA, Travel date: 9/12/2012, Mode: DELTA AIRLINES
9/10/2012 Erica Sollie 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016513, Origin: JFK, Destination:
MSY - LGA, Travel date: 9/12/2012 ,Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS
9/12/2012 Erica Sollie 39.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Economy Comfort Upgrade.
9/12/2012 Erica Sollie 39.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Economy Comfort Upgrade.
9/25/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016603, Origin: EWR,
Destination: MSY Travel date: 9/27/2012, Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS
9/25/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016604, Origin: MSY,
Destination: EWR Travel date: 9/27/2012, Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS
9/25/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 410.80$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 2469973570, Origin: STL, Destination:
EWR Travel date:, Mode: SOUTHWEST AIRLINE
10/1/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 593.32$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016632, Origin: LGA,
Destination: MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/14/2012, Mode: DELTA AIRLINES
10/1/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016632,Origin: LGA, Destination:
MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/14/2012, Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS
10/2/2012 Jesse Loffler 1,288.81$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016635, Origin: LGA,
Destination: MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/13/2012, Mode: DELTA AIRLINES
10/2/2012 Erica Sollie 1,288.81$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016637, Origin: LGA,
Destination: MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/13/2012, Mode: DELTA AIRLINES
10/2/2012 David Yellin 1,288.81$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016636, Origin: LGA,
Destination: MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/13/2012, Mode: DELTA AIRLINES
10/2/2012 Israel David 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016641, Origin: LGA,
Destination: MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/14/2012, Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS
10/2/2012 Jesse Loffler 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016635, Origin: LGA,
Destination: MSY - LGA Traveldate:10/13/2012,Mode:AMERICAN EXPRESS
10/2/2012 Erica Sollie 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016637, Origin: LGA,
Destination: MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/13/2012, Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS
10/2/2012 David Yellin 10.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Ticket #: 7131016636,Origin: LGA, Destination:
MSY - LGA Travel date: 10/13/2012, Mode: AMERICAN EXPRESS
10/13/2012 David Yellin 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Checked baggage fee on Delta airlines Delta
1715; 10/14/2012 - 10/20/2012
10/13/2012 Jesse Loffler 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Flight to New Orleans re trial.
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Travel to New Orleans for Trial.
10/13/2012 Erica Sollie 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Travel to New Orleans for Trial.
10/15/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Travel to New Orleans for trial - Tkt Fee.
10/17/2012 Israel David 516.80$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Airfare to New Orleans LA; Delta #1533
10/18/2012 Israel David 1,234.80$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - Return airfare from Louisiana, New Orleans -
Delta 1403
10/19/2012 Jesse Loffler 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - baggage check fee - flight to New Orleans re
trial prep & trial
10/19/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - baggage fee - Travel to New Orleans
10/20/2012 David Yellin 25.00$ Airfares Airfares/ Trains Expense - baggage fee - Travel to New Orleans
Subtotal 9,579.98$
DATA RESEARCH - WESTLAW/LEXIS
Date Name Amount Description
Page 7 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 10
Exhibit B
8/8/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 143.96$ Data Research - Westlaw
8/19/2012 Jesse Loffler 103.83$ Data Research - Westlaw
8/21/2012 Jesse Loffler 75.04$ Data Research - Westlaw
8/31/2012 David Yellin 85.50$ Data Research - Westlaw
8/31/2012 Jesse Loffler 16.31$ Data Research - Lexis
9/1/2012 Erica Sollie 16.31$ Data Research - Lexis
9/25/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 358.88$ Data Research - Westlaw
9/27/2012 Erica Sollie 32.63$ Data Research - Westlaw
10/18/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 281.58$ Data Research - Westlaw
11/8/2012 Michael B. de Leeuw 179.65$ Data Research - Westlaw
Subtotal 1,293.69$
DATA RESEARCH - MANAGING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Date Name Amount Description
8/10/2012 Managing Attorney 65.32$ Data Research - MA - Colby Attorneys Servi Co. Inc.
9/18/2012 Managing Attorney 26.67$ Data Research - MA - Court Alert Ferrand et al vs. Tom Schedler, et. al.
9/30/2012 Managing Attorney 49.60$ Data Research - MA - Pacer Service Center - 7/1/12 - 9/30/12
9/30/2012 Managing Attorney 73.70$ Data Research - MA - Pacer Service Center - 7/1/12 - 9/30/12
10/17/2012 Managing Attorney 16.20$ Data Research - MA - Court Alert; Ferrand v. Schedler
10/17/2012 Managing Attorney 5.99$ Data Research - MA - Court Alert; Ferrand v. Schedler
11/29/2012 Managing Attorney 14.97$ Data Research - MA - Court Alert - Ferrand v. Schedler
12/18/2012 Managing Attorney 11.98$ Data Research - MA - Court Alert - Ferrand v. Schedler
12/31/2012 Managing Attorney 49.60$ Data Research - MA - Pacer Service
Subtotal 314.03$
COURIER SERVICE/POSTAGE
Date Name Amount Description
8/27/2012 New York Office 0.45$ Postage
9/14/2012 FEDEX NY 91.80$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801360188139 DOUG LAS CADE 628 N 4TH STREET
BATON ROUGE LA
9/14/2012 FEDEX NY 95.14$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801360188117 CELIA CANGELOSI 918 GOVERNMENT
STREET BATON ROUGE LA
9/14/2012 FEDEX NY 91.80$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801360188128 CELIA ALEXANDER/EBONI
TOWNSEND 627 N. 4TH STREET BATON ROUGE LA
9/18/2012 Erica Sollie 148.80$ Lawyers & Consultants - Reimbursement of Ronald L. Wilson for fedex charges.
9/21/2012 FEDEX NY 39.08$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 899685271620 SARAH BRANNON 1350 EYE STREET
NW WASHINGTON DC
9/21/2012 FEDEX NY 28.14$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 899685271630 DALE HO 9 HUDSON ST. NEW YORK
CITY NY
9/23/2012 New York Office 0.45$ Postage
10/4/2012 FEDEX NY 17.21$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801050803600 CELIA R. CANGELOSI 918
GOVERMENT STREET BATON ROUGE LA
10/4/2012 FEDEX NY 12.83$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801050803585 CELIA MARIE WILLIAMS- ALEXANDE
627 NORTH 4TH STREET BATON ROUGE LA
Page 8 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 10
Exhibit B
10/4/2012 FEDEX NY 12.83$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801050803655 DOUGLAS L. CADE 628 N. 4TH
STREET BATON ROUGE LA
10/4/2012 FEDEX NY 8.05$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801050803552 NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATIO
99 HUDSON STREET NEW YORK CITY NY
10/4/2012 FEDEX NY 12.83$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801050803541 HON. JANE TRICHE MILAZZO 500
POYDRAS STREET NEW ORLEANS LA
10/8/2012 FEDEX NY 12.83$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105935 JOZE F BOROS 701 POYDRAS STREET
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 53.82$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105843 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 63.61$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105887 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 63.61$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105979 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 68.50$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105854 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 56.28$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105876 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 58.71$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105898 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 68.50$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105924 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 70.95$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105968 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 51.40$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048106081 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 44.03$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105902 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 44.03$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048106004 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 46.48$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105957 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 53.82$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105980 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 58.71$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048105990 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/12/2012 FEDEX NY 51.38$ Courier Service - Tracking#: 801048106070 ROLAND L. WILSON 701 POYDRAS ST
NEW ORLEANS LA
10/18/2012 FEDEX NY 32.02$ Courier Service - Invoice#: 206470350 Tracking#: 801131174932 ERICA SOLLIE
ONE NEW YORK PLZ NEW YORK CITY NY
10/18/2012 FEDEX NY 33.64$ Courier Service - Invoice#: 206470350 Tracking#: 801131174884 ERICA SOLLIE 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 22 NEW YORK CITY NY
10/18/2012 FEDEX NY 32.02$ Courier Service - Invoice#: 206470350 Tracking#: 801131174910 ERICA SOLLIE
ONE NEW YORK PLZ NEW YORK CITY NY
10/18/2012 FEDEX NY 32.02$ Courier Service - Invoice#: 206470350 Tracking#: 801131174943 ERICA SOLLIE 1
NEW YORK PLZ NEW YORK CITY NY
10/18/2012 FEDEX NY 30.16$ Courier Service - Invoice#: 206470350 Tracking#: 801131174954 ERICA SOLLIE
ONE NEW YORK PLZ NEW YORK CITY NY
10/18/2012 FEDEX NY 32.02$ Courier Service - Invoice#: 206470350 Tracking#: 801131174900 ERICA SOLHE 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 22 NEW YORK CITY NY
10/18/2012 FEDEX NY 55.97$ Courier Service - Invoice#: 206470350 Tracking#: 801131174987 ERICA SOLLIE 1
NEW YORK PLZ NEW YORK CITY NY
12/31/2012 New York Office 0.45$ Postage
Page 9 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 10
Exhibit B
Subtotal 1,674.37$
FILING FEES
Date Name Amount Description
8/15/2012 Jesse Loffler 200.00$ Filing Fees Expense - Ronald L. Wilson
9/11/2012 Jesse Loffler 100.00$ Lawyers & Consultants - Reimbursement of filing fees to Ronald L. Wilson.
Subtotal 300.00$
COURT REPORTING
Date Name Amount Description
10/18/2012 Jesse Loffler 2,381.40$ Court Reporting - Susan A. Zielie, RMR, FCRR - 10/15-17 trial transcripts
Subtotal 2,381.40$
MISCELLANEOUS
Date Name Amount Description
8/13/2012 Frank Herbert 5.00$ Dues Subscriptions and Dues Expense - Obtain a certificate of good standing on
behalf of Israel David.
8/13/2012 Frank Herbert 4.50$ Out of Town Local Transportation - Travel to the Appellate Division, 2d
Department to obtain a certificate of good standing on behalf of I. David.
10/9/2012 Jesse Loffler 43.50$ Specialty Supply Purchases
10/12/2012 SEC.SERV. 60.00$ Secretarial Overtime - Russo, Amanda
10/30/2012 Jesse Loffler 1,237.50$ Miscellaneous - Jozef Boros- Litigation Support for Trial Technology
Subtotal 1,350.50$
TOTAL COSTS & EXPENSES: 49,838.96$
Page 10 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-14 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR. and theLOUISIANA STATE CONFERENCE OFTHE NAACP, for themselves and all otherpersons similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 2:H-cv-00926-JTM-JCW
V.
TOM SCHEDLER in his official capacityas the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZYSONNIER, in her official capacity asSecretary of the Louisiana Department ofChildren & Family Services, and BRUCED. GREENSTEIN, in his official capacityas Secretary of the Louisiana Department ofHealth & Hospitals,
Defendants.
DECLARATION OF CYRUS MEHRI
I, Cyrus Mehri, hereby declare the following:
1. I have been asked by attorneys for Project Vote to provide information,
based on my personal knowledge and belief, and my opinions regarding the
reasonableness of the hourly rates that they seek to have recognized in the petition for
attorneys’ fees in this case.
2. I have served as co-lead class counsel in some of the largest and most
significant race and gender cases in U.S. history, achieving innovative programmatic
relief in settlements. Roberts v. Texaco Inc., ($176 million; S.D.N.Y. 1997); Ingram v.
The Coca-Cola Company ($192 million; N.D. Ga. 2001); Robinson v. Ford Motor
Company ($10 million and 279 apprentice positions; S.D. Ohio 2005); August-
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-15 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 3
Johnson v. Morgan Stanley ($47 million; D.D.C. 2007); Amachoev v. Smith Barney ($34
million; N.D. Cal. 2008); Norfiet v. John Hancock Life Insurance Co. ($24 million; D.
Conn. 2009), and Carter v. Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC ($32 million; D.D.C. 2011).
3. I also serve on the judicial nominations committees for the American
Constitution Society and the National Employment Lawyers Association. In addition, I
serve on the Cornell Law School Advisory counsel.
4. My firm, Mehri & Skalet (M&S), of which I am a founding partner, is a
leading class action and complex litigation firm. Our practice includes representing
employees, consumers, investors, small businesses and others in high-impact cases.
Lawyers at M&S have achieved landmark employment and civil rights victories. The
firm also has achieved substantial results for consumers from companies such as Hewlett
Packard, Ford, Kellogg, and Dell Computers. With this practice, our firm routinely
makes fee applications in federal court. To best of my knowledge, our fee petitions
have been approved by the Courts without criticism.
5. I am familiar with Project Vote and its well-established history of
empowering, educating, and mobilizing underrepresented voters. I hold the attorneys at
Project Vote in high esteem for their legal skills, analytic ability, and professionalism. I
mooted their attorneys in an appellate case and witnessed their skill first hand. I have
also read a number of the legal opinions stemming from their very important work. All of
the attorneys I have encountered at Project Vote bring an extraordinary degree of
competence, knowledge, skill, and expertise to their voting rights law practice.
6. I am generally familiar with hourly rates charged by attorneys nationwide
in finns that litigate civil rights class actions and similar matters of significant complexity
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-15 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 3
at the trial level. I am aware of those rates because they are published in court opinions,
the legal press, and surveys. As my firm is based in Washington, DC, I am particularly
familiar with the prevailing rates charged by law firms in that market.
7. I understand that the following table reflects the current hourly rates being
sought by Project Vote attorneys who participated in the above-captioned matter, Scott v.
Schedler:
Law School Year Rate per hourProject Directors $600Assistant Counsel 2005 $475Assistant Counsel 2011 $280Paralegals $175Legal Assistants / Law Clerks $125
8. In my opinion, these hourly rates are generally below the current market rates for
litigation attorneys in Washington, D.C. of comparable experience, ability, skills, and
reputation in civil rights class actions and other similarly complex litigation in federal
trial courts.
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to
the best of my knowledge.
Executed on: February 25, 2013
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-15 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 3
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LUTHER SCOTT, JR., and LOUISIANA
STATE CONFERENCE OF THE
NAACP,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TOM SCHEDLER, in his official capacity as
the Louisiana Secretary of State, SUZY
SONNIER, in her official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Children & Family Services, and BRUCE D.
GREENSTEIN, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Health & Hospitals,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-
JCW
Section ―H‖
LR 54.2 DECLARATION OF
SARAH BRANNON
SARAH BRANNON, declares pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 as follows:
1. I am an attorney admitted pro hac vice to practice before this Court, and I
am the Director of the Public Agency Voter Registration Program at Project Vote. Project Vote
served as counsel for Plaintiffs, Luther Scott, Jr. and Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP,
(―Plaintiffs‖). I submit this declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ motion to set attorneys’ fees and
costs.
2. This declaration is based on my personal knowledge, my consultation with
colleagues at Legal Defense and Educational Fund (―LDF‖); Project Vote, Fried, Frank, Harris,
Shriver & Jacobson LLP (―Fried Frank‖), and attorney Ronald Wilson, and a review of
documents related to this action. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 10
2
3. This litigation was filed on April 19, 2011. I am fully familiar with all
aspects of the case.
4. Plaintiffs filed this civil rights action against Defendants on April 19,
2011, against a backdrop of many years of non-compliance with the National Voter Registration
Act, 42 U.S.C. §1973gg-5 (―NVRA‖). Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief,
including a permanent injunction requiring Defendants, their agents and successors in office, and
all persons working in concert with them, to implement practices and procedures in compliance
with Section 7 of the NVRA.
5. Project Vote has been involved in all aspects of the litigation. This case is
a large and complex case, and required considerable resources. Project Vote, LDF, Ronald
Wilson and for the purpose of trial Fried Frank, partnered together in order to prosecute the case
most effectively. All served as co-counsel for Plaintiffs.
6. It is worth noting that Plaintiffs tried to settle this case on numerous
occasions, including before suit was even filed. Before filing, Plaintiffs attempted to resolve the
issues without litigation by serving Defendants with a notice letter in January 2011, advising
Defendants of their non-compliance with federal law, and requesting a meeting with Defendants.
These efforts were unsuccessful as Defendants failed to provide any meaningful response to
Plaintiffs’ request for a meeting at that time. Plaintiffs then attempted to settle this case on
numerous other occasions as litigation progressed. All of the Plaintiffs’ attempts to reach a
settlement were rebuffed and unsuccessful, including the Court ordered-mediation in May 2012
with Magistrate Judge Wilkinson. Plaintiffs were ready to engage in meaningful negotiations,
but like all previous attempts, settlement discussions were unsuccessful. On the morning the
mediation was scheduled, Defendants filed a motion seeking an interlocutory appeal of this
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 10
3
Court’s order on Partial Summary Judgment and came to the settlement conference with no
interest in even discussing settlement.
7. Plaintiffs are entitled to costs and fees under this Court’s Order, dated
January 22, 2013. Doc. 436. On January 22, 2013, this Court rendered its Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law finding that all three defendants had violated the voter registration
obligations under Section 7 of the NVRA in numerous different respects. See Doc. 436 at 20
(DHH); 25-26 (DCFS); and 28 (SOS). This Court entered judgment for Plaintiffs and awarded
Plaintiffs reasonable attorneys fees, litigation expenses, and costs.
8. Project Vote is a non-partisan, non-profit organization based in
Washington D.C. Project Vote has been counsel in numerous other cases similar to the current
case, seeking compliance of Section 7 of the NVRA. These cases include Valdez v. Squier, 676
F.3d 935 (10th Cir. 2012); Black Political Empowerment Project v. Aichele, Civ. No. 12-cv-
03808 (E.D.Pa. 2012); GA NAACP v. Kemp, 11-cv-1849 (N.D.Ga. 2012); NAACP v. Gargano,
09-cv-849 (S.D.Ind. 2011); Harkless v. Brunner, No. 06-CV-2294 (N.D.Ohio 2009); and Ass’n
of Comm. Orgs. For Reform Now v. Levy, 08-4084-CV (W.D.Mo. 2009). Additionally, Project
Vote has been counsel regularly in other voting rights cases, such as Project Vote v. Long, 682
F.3d 331 (4th Cir. 2012) (challenging public access to voter registration files); Voting for
America v. Andrade, -- F. Supp. 2d --, 2012 WL 3155566 (S.D. Tex. 2012) (currently on appeal
in the Fifth Circuit) (challenging restrictions on voter registration drives); and Arcia v. Detzner, -
- F. Supp. 2d --, 2012 WL 6212564 (S.D. Fla. 2012) (currently on appeal in the Eleventh Circuit)
(challenging pre-Election Day purges of suspected non-citizens from the voting rolls).
9. Project Vote provides representation to clients, such as the Plaintiffs in
this case, who are unable to pay for the legal services required to litigate their claims and
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 10
4
vindicate their federally-protected rights. We, therefore, do not generally bill clients for our
legal services, and we obtain no compensation unless we are successful. Based upon information
regarding the prevailing rates charged by attorneys in Washington D.C. of similar experience,
skills, and reputation in civil rights cases and other similarly complex litigation in federal trial
courts, the hourly rates for Project Vote staff are reflected in the chart below. I believe the
following rates are reasonable:
Law School Year Rate per hour
Project Director – Nicole Kovite Zeitler and
Sarah Brannon
2006, and 1999
respectively
$600
Assistant Counsel – Niyati Shah 2005 $475
Assistant Counsel – Michelle Rupp 2011 $280
Paralegals/Policy Analyst – Kelly Gerlach $175
10. I am admitted to practice law in Maryland, having been first admitted in
1999. I graduated from the University of Maryland School of Law in 1999. I have more than 10
years of litigation experience, including handling numerous large complex litigations addressing
civil rights, civil liberties and election law claims. I was previously employed as a staff attorney
at the Fair Elections Legal Network, where my work included serving as counsel representing
plaintiffs in Common Cause of Colorado v. Bernie Buescher, Civil No. 08-CV-2321 JKL, filed
in United States District Court for the District of Colorado. In that case, Plaintiffs alleged
Colorado’s voter purging practices violated the National Voter Registration Act—the litigation
was resolved after successful settlement of 3 of the 4 claims. My most recent complex litigation
experience before coming to Project Vote involved serving as one of the counsel for more than
300 plaintiffs in a toxic tort case against Exxon Mobile Corporation. I was responsible for
overseeing all the evidence related to plaintiffs’ injuries, including plaintiffs’ depositions. That
case ultimately resulted in a 1.5 billion dollar jury verdict awarded in 2011.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 10
5
11. I am currently the Director of the Public Agency Voter Registration
Program at Project Vote and have been in this position since March 2012. In this position, my
work at Project Vote specifically includes supervising efforts around the country to ensure
effective implementation of Section 7 of the NVRA. My NVRA work includes litigation against
states for failure to comply with the NVRA, advice and technical assistance regarding
compliance with the NVRA to cooperative states, and research and writing on NVRA
implementation. I have performed legal work related to a number of other NVRA cases similar
to the case before this Court.
12. Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct statement of the hours and
services I have rendered in this case. I prepared this statement based upon a review of my
contemporaneous time records. It is my practice to keep regular records of the time I spend on
litigation matters in a time tracking system upon the completion of the task that I have rendered
for which I intend to bill.
13. I believe the hours I am claiming are reasonable.
14. In my capacity as Director of the Public Agency Voter Registration
Program, I am familiar with this case, including the pleadings and other papers filed in the case,
as well as depositions, hearings and the trial conducted therein. In my capacity as Director, all
members of Project Vote's legal staff, including attorneys, interns, policy analyst and paralegal,
working on this case are under my supervision and report their activities to me regularly. Project
Vote requires staff to keep contemporaneous time records in all legal cases. I have reviewed the
legal time records filed as Exhibits B-E, which are time records for Nicole Kovite Zeitler, Niayti
Shah, Michelle Rupp and Kelly Gerlach. The records attached are a true and accurate reflection
of Project Vote's work on this case.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 10
6
15. Nicole Kovite Zeitler was the Director of Project Vote’s Public Agency
Voter Registration Program from October 2008 through February 2012. In that capacity, her
work at Project Vote specifically involved efforts around the country to ensure effective
implementation of Section 7 of the NVRA. Her NVRA work included litigation against states
for failure to comply with the NVRA, advice and technical assistance regarding compliance with
the NVRA to cooperative states, and research and writing on NVRA implementation. She
performed legal work related to a number of other NVRA cases similar to the case before this
Court. She graduated from the Washington School of Law in 2006 and is a member of the
Washington State Bar. Attached as Exhibit B is an accurate and contemporaneous itemization
for the hours that Ms. Zeitler expended in this litigation.
16. Niyati Shah has been an Election Counsel at Project Vote since July 2010.
I supervise her. In that capacity, she performs legal work related to the above captioned case and
other federal election litigation. Her work at Project Vote specifically involves efforts around
the country to ensure effective implementation of Section 7 of the NVRA. Her NVRA work
includes litigation against states for failure to comply with the NVRA, advice and technical
assistance regarding compliance with the NVRA to cooperative states, and research and writing
on NVRA implementation. She graduated from the Rutgers University School of Law –
Camden in 2005 and is a member of the New Jersey bar since 2005 and the New York bar since
2006. Prior to working at Project Vote, she worked at the New York City Department of
Consumer Affairs as staff counsel and at the Legal Services of Northwest Jersey. Attached as
Exhibit C is an accurate and contemporaneous itemization for the hours Ms. Shah expended in
this matter
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 10
7
17. Michelle Rupp has been Election Counsel and Assistant General Counsel
with Project Vote since the summer of 2011. I supervise her. In that capacity, she performs legal
work related to the above-captioned case and other federal election litigation. Her work at
Project Vote specifically involves efforts around the country to ensure effective implementation
of Section 7 of the NVRA. Her NVRA work includes litigation against states for failure to
comply with the NVRA, advice and technical assistance regarding compliance with the NVRA
to cooperative states, and research and writing on NVRA implementation. Ms. Rupp graduated
from Georgetown University Law Center in 2011. While in law school, she served as Editor in
Chief of the Georgetown Immigration Law Journal and was Vice President of the school’s
Election Law Society. Before joining Project Vote as Election Counsel, Ms. Rupp interned for 3
semesters at the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law and Project Vote. Ms.
Rupp holds Bachelor of Arts degrees in Political Science and History from Arizona State
University, where she graduated summa cum laude. Attached as Exhibit D is an accurate and
contemporaneous itemizations for the hours that Ms. Rupp expended in this litigation.
18. Kelly Gerlach works as a Policy Analyst for Project Vote. She has held
this position since fall 2011. I supervise her. In this position, she coordinates and analyzes data
on state compliance with federal laws for the NVRA program. Previously, Ms. Gerlach worked
for Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan's office, where she administered state and federal
elections. Ms. Gerlach has a Master of Public Administration from Southern Illinois University,
which she earned in 2010. Attached as Exhibit E is an accurate and contemporaneous
itemizations for the hours that Ms. Gerlach expended in this litigation.
19. Below is a chart summarizing the total number of hours and correlating
fees for each Project Vote staff person for whom Plaintiffs seek compensation:
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 10
8
Person Hourly
Rate
Hours
Billed
Hourly
Fees Due
Travel
Hours
Travel Fees
Due
Total Fees
Due
Sarah Brannon $600 612.4 $367,440 89.7 $26,910 $394,310
Nicole Kovite
Zeitler
$600 593.3 $355,980 45.5 $13,650 $369,630
Niyati Shah $475 710.9 $337,677.5 71 $16,862.5 $354,540
Michelle Rupp $280 522.5 $146,300 37.5 $5215 $151,515
Kelly Gerlach $175 22 $3,850 - - $3,850
Sum $1, 273,845
- 10%
TOTAL $1,146,460
20. The above chart breaks out the time spent by Project Vote’s staff solely
for travel. As part of Plaintiffs’ effort to ensure that this fee petition is fair and reasonable,
Project Vote is only seeking to recover for travel time at 50% of any given staff person’s hourly
rate.
21. At all times, Project Vote attorneys conducted their representation of
Plaintiffs as efficiently and economically as possible within the bounds of our duty to pursue our
client’s claims zealously.
22. Plaintiffs wish to be reasonable and fair in seeking fees, and therefore,
Project Vote did not necessarily record time for every conference call or meeting with members
of Plaintiffs’ legal team, either in whole or in part. Accordingly, the work logs of others may
reflect meetings or calls that we attended or in which Project Vote attorneys or staff participated
but for which Project Vote attorneys or staff did not separately bill or billed for a lesser time
period. Any such discrepancy reflects a decision to exercise billing judgment in recordation of
time, rather than an inaccuracy in time records.
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 10
9
23. Because Plaintiffs wishes to be reasonable and fair in seeking fees, Project
Vote has voluntarily lowered the hours billed in several instances. Those instances include: 1)
excluding all time related to pre-suit survey investigation, which included approximately 66
hours of time spent by Project Vote’s investigator, Michael Richards and 25 hours by Nicole
Kovite Zeitler; 2) excluding all time expended by Project Vote’s more senior staff, such as the
General Counsel, who provided limited but meaningful oversight, advice and supervision as the
case progressed; 3) excluding all time of Project Vote’s paralegal–the work by Project Vote’s
paralegal in this matter was mostly administrative, but still very useful; 4) the time of Michelle
Rupp, Project Vote’s least experienced election counsel, was reduced by almost 100 hours to
account for any potential concern about duplication of efforts; 6) for any depositions or court
appearances (other than trial, where all attorney’s present were actively involved and necessary)
if more than 2 Project Vote attorneys were present, all time for the additional third attorney as
excluded and 5) Project Vote’s legal interns contributed over 100 hours of work to this matter,
none of which has been included in this fee petition.
24. Additionally, any time spent by Project Vote staff on this fee petition or in
with respect to the defense of any re-depositions of witness has been excluded.
25. In addition, as part of our goal of being reasonable and fair, Project Vote is
lowering the actual amount it is seeking in fees by 10% across the board. This reduction is
documented in the chart above. This is being done in part to account for any potential concerns
about duplicative work or efforts by Project Vote’s staff.
26. Plaintiffs seek compensation for the costs and expenses expended by
Project Vote in connection to this litigation. Attached in Exhibit F to this Declaration are
accurate records detailing the costs and expenses incurred related to this litigation. The total
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-16 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 10
Exhibit A
Sarah Brannon (Time Records)
Date Last name Task Note Hours
23-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails prep 0.10
26-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout oppn to secondmotion to strike 0.10
26-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsre: draft of summaryjudgment 0.10
26-Mar-12 Brannon Review and analyzecourt's order regardingmotion to strike 0.10
27-Mar-12 Brannon Review and analyze legal research 0.10
27-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsre: motion for additionaldiscovery 0.20
27-Mar-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants 0.30
28-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsre: oral argumentpreparation 0.10
28-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsrelated to oppn to motionfor discovery 0.20
29-Mar-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
re: opposition to motionfor leave 0.30
29-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails leave 0.20
29-Mar-12 Brannon Research summary judgment 0.30
29-Mar-12 Brannon Review and revise draft oppn to motion for leave 0.30
29-Mar-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants motion for leave 0.20
30-Mar-12 Brannon Review and revise draft re: motion for leave 0.80
30-Mar-12 Brannon Review and analyze [redacted] 0.20
30-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: motion for leave 0.50
30-Mar-12 Brannon Review and revise draft re: summary judgment 0.50
30-Mar-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.20
30-Mar-12 Brannon Review and analyzedraft oppn to motion tostrike 0.30
30-Mar-12 Brannon Review and revise draft oppn to motion for leave 0.50
2-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to motion fordiscovery 0.50
2-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsoppn to motion fordiscovery 0.50
2-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: oppn motion to strike 0.30
2-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draft oppn to strike 0.30
2-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draft surreply 0.50
3-Apr-12 Brannon Review draft court filings
reviewed final edits tooppn to motion foradditional discovery 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 26
3-Apr-12 Brannon Review draft court filings
reviewed motion forleave to file newdeclaration from Rev.Taylor and proposedorder 0.20
3-Apr-12 Brannon Review draft court filings
reviewed and editeddraft of Pls surreply filedin response to SoS replyto submit additionalevidence 1.20
3-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsoppn motion additionaldiscovery 0.50
3-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails declaration 0.40
3-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draft surreply 0.70
4-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: discovery responses 0.40
4-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailspreparation for oralargument 0.10
6-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about discovery 0.10
6-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout preparation fororal argument 0.20
9-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: summary judgment 0.20
9-Apr-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
re motion for summaryjudgment 0.50
9-Apr-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument [redacted] 1.50
10-Apr-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument [redacted] 1.80
11-Apr-12 Brannon Review and analyze court order 0.10
13-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails summary judgment 0.20
15-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding [redacted] 0.20
15-Apr-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants
Def. Schedler's rule56(d) motion 0.40
16-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about rule 56(d) motion 0.40
16-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to Def. Schedler'srule 56 (d) motion 2.20
17-Apr-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument [redacted] 2.00
17-Apr-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants 0.20
19-Apr-12 Brannon travel timeto New Orleans for oralargument 4.50
20-Apr-12 Brannon Attend oral argument regarding PSJM 2.60
20-Apr-12 Brannon travel time from New Orleans 4.50
23-Apr-12 Brannon Research re: [redacted] 0.30
23-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draft summary judgment 0.20
23-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re summary judgment 0.30
23-Apr-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
regarding Court's orderand [redacted] 0.90
23-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.10
23-Apr-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions 0.50
23-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draft [redacted] 0.10
23-Apr-12 Brannon Review and analyze Court's order 0.10
24-Apr-12 Brannon Draft memo and research [redcted] 1.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 26
24-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with litigation team aboutschedule meet andconfer; and schedulingsettlement conferencewith magistrate judge. 0.40
24-Apr-12 Brannon
Draft oppn to motion forsummary judgment worked [redacted] 0.20
25-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsre: filing for magistratejudge 0.20
25-Apr-12 Brannon Research and prepare filing for Mag. judge 0.50
25-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails proposal 0.20
26-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding settlement 0.20
26-Apr-12 Brannon Review and analyzeproposed settlementagreement 0.20
27-Apr-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout submission formagistrate judge 0.30
27-Apr-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions [redacted] 0.50
29-Apr-12 Brannon Review and revise draft [redacted] 2.20
30-Apr-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions [redacted 0.30
30-Apr-12 Brannon Attorney work productreviewed draft letter[redacted] 0.40
1-May-12 Brannon Review and analyze settlement proposal 0.60
1-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout settlementproposals 0.20
2-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team [redacted] 1.00
2-May-12 Brannon
Prepare for telephoneconference call
with defense counsel formeet and confer aboutsettlement 0.50
2-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails 0.60
2-May-12 Brannon Review and analyze draft settlement proposal 0.60
3-May-12 Brannon Attorney work productdiscussion with N. Shahabout [redacted] 0.20
3-May-12 Brannon Review and analyze
opinion from Court grantPartial Sum Judge forPls. 0.70
3-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
confer call with allcounsel 0.50
3-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with all parties regardingsettlement 0.40
3-May-12 Brannon Review and revise draft
letter and chart for Mag.Judge regardingsettlement conference 0.60
4-May-12 Brannon Review and revise draft
letter and chart for Mag.Judge for settlementconference 0.30
4-May-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions [redacted] 0.50
8-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about settlement 0.30
8-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails depositions 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 26
8-May-12 Brannon travel time for mediation 6.70
9-May-12 Brannon Prepare for court conferencemeet with co-counselabout mediation 0.70
9-May-12 Brannon Attend court conference court order mediation 1.00
9-May-12 Brannon draft e-mail about next steps 0.20
9-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.30
9-May-12 Brannon Attend meeting about [redacted] 0.50
9-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout motion forimmediately appeal/stay 0.40
9-May-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants for immediate appeal 0.50
9-May-12 Brannon Attend meeting with [redacted] 0.50
10-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout Def's filing reappeal request 0.20
10-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call about depositions 0.50
10-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about depositions 0.40
10-May-12 Brannon travel time from LA 3.20
11-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about depositions 0.50
14-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout motion forappeal/stay 0.40
14-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: depositions 0.20
15-May-12 Brannon Draft and review to do list for next steps 0.50
15-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 0.60
15-May-12 Brannon Review and analyze deposition prep 0.40
16-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout depositiontranscript 0.20
16-May-12 Brannon Review and revise draft appeal 0.70
16-May-12 Brannon Researchre: oppn to motion forappeal 0.40
16-May-12 Brannon Review and analyze [redacted] 0.30
17-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout schedulingdepositions 0.40
17-May-12 Brannon Review and analyzedocuments fordeposition prep 1.20
17-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout discoverydocuments 0.10
17-May-12 Brannon Attorney work productmeeting and emailsregarding [redacted] 0.50
18-May-12 Brannon Review and analyzematerials related todepositions prep 0.60
18-May-12 Brannon Review and revise draft appeal 0.80
18-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 1.10
21-May-12 Brannon Review and revise draft appeal 0.80
21-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about schedule 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 26
21-May-12 Brannon Attorney work product
reviewed emails anddocuments related to[redacted] 1.20
21-May-12 Brannon Draft discovery summaries 0.80
22-May-12 Brannon Attend meeting
with PV staff aboutdepositions and nextsteps 1.50
22-May-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants re: discovery request 0.30
22-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about depositions 0.30
22-May-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions [redacted] 0.30
23-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 0.20
23-May-12 Brannon Review and analyze draft letter to the judge 0.30
23-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails status conference 0.20
23-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails DHH discovery requests 0.20
23-May-12 Brannon Review and analyze discovery responses 0.50
23-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
regarding statusconference. 0.30
24-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with the Judge regardingstatus 0.20
24-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about depositions 0.20
24-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about status call 0.30
24-May-12 Brannon Review and revise draft appeal 0.50
24-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout oppn to motion forappeal 0.50
24-May-12 Brannon Attend meeting
with PV staff aboutdepositions and statusconference with thecourt 0.50
24-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout discoveryresponses 0.20
24-May-12 Brannon review discovery responses 0.70
25-May-12 Brannon Draft witness and exhibit list 2.20
25-May-12 Brannon draft e-mail regarding witness list 0.20
25-May-12 Brannon Attend meeting
regarding drafting ofmotion for summaryjudgment 0.50
29-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: witness list 0.60
29-May-12 Brannon Review various e-mails appeal 0.10
29-May-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call 1.00
29-May-12 Brannon Research and preparememo regarding[redacted] 1.20
29-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding depositions 0.10
30-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.20
31-May-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsfrom Ron Wilson about[redacted] 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 26
31-May-12 Brannon Attend meetingwith N. Shah and M.Rupp about [redacted] 0.50
31-May-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.40
1-Jun-12 Brannon Attend meeting with PV LA team 1.00
1-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about depositions 0.30
4-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call 0.60
5-Jun-12 Brannon travel timeto New Orleans for Pls.depositions 4.70
5-Jun-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions [redacted] 2.50
6-Jun-12 Brannon Attend depositions
defendant Dr. Johnsonand Rev. Taylor indeposition - (all day)and prep [redacted] 8.50
7-Jun-12 Brannon Attend depositions [redacted] 3.50
7-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draftPlaintiffs witness andexhibit list 2.30
7-Jun-12 Brannon Attend meetingwith the team afterdepositions 2.50
8-Jun-12 Brannon travel time from New Orleans 5.00
10-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team [redacted] 0.70
10-Jun-12 Brannon draft e-mail re: edits to [redacted] 0.20
10-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motion to [redacted] 0.70
11-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call with D. Ho 0.30
11-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails motion [redacted] 1.20
11-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mails [redacted] 0.20
11-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motion [redacted] 1.50
11-Jun-12 Brannon draft e-mailto defense counsel about[redacted] 0.40
12-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mails
from defense counselabout motion to adjustschedule 0.20
12-Jun-12 Brannon draft e-mailto defense counselregarding scheduling 0.10
12-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsregarding depositiontranscripts 0.10
12-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding motion toadjust schedule 0.80
13-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding motion toadjust schedule 0.50
13-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draft schedule 0.40
13-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsfrom defense counselabout scheduling 0.10
14-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re [redacted] 0.20
15-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motion to expedite 0.50
15-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draft [redacted] 0.20
15-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: [redacted] 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 26
15-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about filing [redacted] 0.80
17-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails next steps 0.10
18-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
regarding schedulingand [redacted] 0.50
18-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding motion toexpedite 0.20
18-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call with court 0.10
18-Jun-12 Brannon Attend meetingwith PV team about[redacted] 0.50
18-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draft letter to court 0.20
19-Jun-12 Brannon Review and analyze letter to court 0.10
19-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about[redacted] 0.30
19-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re letter to court 0.30
19-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about next steps 1.00
20-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about sum. judgment 0.50
20-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails related to [redacted] 0.20
21-Jun-12 Brannon
Review and revise draftdiscovery responses 0.80
21-Jun-12 Brannon Attorney work productfinalize and filediscovery response 0.20
21-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails court conference 0.40
22-Jun-12 Brannon Review and analyzediscovery requests fromSOS to NAACP 0.20
22-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
regarding newscheduling order anddrafting motion forsummary judgment 0.40
22-Jun-12 Brannon
Review and revise draft motionfor summary judgment 4.00
22-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
discussed preparing forstatus conference withcourt 0.50
22-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with the Court andopposing counselregarding case schedule 0.50
23-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith PV staff about draftmotion for summ. judg. 0.20
23-Jun-12 Brannon
Review and revise draft motionfor summary judgment 2.20
25-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.40
25-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draft case/briefing schedule 0.30
25-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout case/briefingschedule 0.60
25-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.30
25-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mails [redacted] 0.50
25-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout SOS latestdiscovery request 0.40
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 26
26-Jun-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call 0.80
26-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout summ jud. andnext steps 0.60
26-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsabout research re:[redacted] 0.50
26-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsabout exhibits for summjud. 0.40
27-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout response to[redacted] 0.70
27-Jun-12 Brannon
Review and revise draft motionfor summary judgment 2.50
27-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsabout scheduling[redacted] 0.20
27-Jun-12 Brannon Attorney work productreview exhibits for summjud motion 1.20
27-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout scheduling andbriefing schedule 0.30
27-Jun-12 Brannon Draft letter to [redacted] 1.80
27-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout exhibits for summjud. 0.30
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout edits to statementof facts 0.80
28-Jun-12 Brannon draft e-mail [redacted] 0.10
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draftstatement of factsrelated to Summ Jud 2.70
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about cites in summ jud 0.50
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout next steps forfinish edits to sum jud 0.30
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about edits to [redacted] 0.40
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review and incorporate edits to letter to [redacted] 0.70
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsfrom N. Shah about[redated] 0.10
28-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about citation [redacted] 0.80
29-Jun-12 Brannon Attorney work productreview email from def.counsel about deposition 0.10
29-Jun-12 Brannon Review and revise draftrelated to motion summjud 0.60
29-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout edits to motion forsumm jud 0.70
29-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.20
29-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith co-counsel aboutscheduling [redacted] 0.20
29-Jun-12 Brannon
Review and revise draft motionfor summary judgment 1.30
30-Jun-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith co-counsel aboutscheduling [redacted] 0.30
30-Jun-12 Brannon
Review and revise draft motionfor summary judgment 1.60
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 26
1-Jul-12 Brannon draft e-mail
to defense counsel aboutscheduling [redacted]deposition 0.10
1-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith co-counel about[reacted] 0.80
2-Jul-12 Brannon draft e-mailwith long summary[redacted] 0.90
2-Jul-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions [redacted] 1.00
2-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call with Pls. [redacted] 0.70
2-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails judg 0.50
2-Jul-12 Brannon Research motion to quash 0.30
2-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith co-counsel aboutdrafting motion to quash 0.50
2-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith co-counsel about[redacted] 0.40
2-Jul-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants
notice of deposition forMr. Heckard 0.10
2-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith co-counsel aboutscheduling [redacted] 0.30
2-Jul-12 Brannon
Review and revise draft motionfor summary judgment
and reviewed othersedits to motion 5.10
2-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith defense counselabout scheduling 0.10
2-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftstatement of facts forsumm judg. 1.40
3-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout filing of Motion forsumm jud 0.10
3-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftMotion for SummaryJudgment 2.20
3-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
about collectingadditional discoverydocuments from pls. 0.70
3-Jul-12 Brannon Attorney work product
followed-up on gettingtranscript from call withCourt 0.20
3-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout transcript from callwith court 0.10
3-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.30
6-Jul-12 Brannon Review discovery responses and [redacted] 1.50
6-Jul-12 Brannon Review and incorporate editsto draft motion to quashsubpoena 0.60
6-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
attempted to call theCourt to discuss Court'sorder regarding briefingschedule 0.10
6-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
related to Court's orderregarding briefingschedule 2.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 26
6-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with co-counselregarding Court's orderregarding briefingschedule 0.40
7-Jul-12 Brannon
Review and revise draftdiscovery responses including [redacted] 4.50
7-Jul-12 Brannon Draft motionto quash Rule 45subpoena 2.10
7-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about SOS motion 1.20
8-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draft
motion for extension oftime to respond tomotion to compel 0.70
8-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding [redacted] 0.50
8-Jul-12 Brannon Draft letter [redacted] 0.50
8-Jul-12 Brannon Review and analyzemotion to compel filedby SoS 0.40
8-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout drafting responseto [redacted] 1.50
9-Jul-12 Brannon Review and analyze [redacted] 0.40
9-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.40
10-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motion to quast 0.80
10-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails quash 0.50
10-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftmotion forreconsideration 0.70
10-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding rulred re[redacted] 0.50
10-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.20
10-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails motion to expedite 0.20
10-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails discovery issues 0.50
11-Jul-12 Brannon travel timewith N. Shah to BatonRouge for deposition. 4.50
11-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout filing motion toquash 0.30
11-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
about filing motion toquash 0.20
11-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftmotion to quashsubpoena for documents 0.80
12-Jul-12 Brannon Review and analyzemotion to extenddiscovery by SoS 0.20
12-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftextend discoverydeadline 2.50
12-Jul-12 Brannon Review and analyzeSOS opposition tomotion to quash 0.20
12-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call [redacted] 1.00
12-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.50
12-Jul-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions {redacted] and defendant 4.50
13-Jul-12 Brannon Draft letter [redacted] 0.80
13-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
Rupp regarding[redacted] 0.90
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 26
13-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with litigation teamregarding drafting[redacted] 0.70
13-Jul-12 Brannon travel time
travel from Baton Rougefor deposition of NAACPtreasurer 6.00
13-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding [redacted] 0.50
15-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding [redacted] 0.30
15-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to motion tocompel filed by SOS 1.30
15-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding [redacted] 0.40
15-Jul-12 Brannon Attorney work product sent e-mail [redacted] 0.30
16-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to motion tocompel filed by SOS 0.20
17-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call 1.00
18-Jul-12 Brannon
Telephone conference call withteam
regarding discoveryissues 1.30
18-Jul-12 Brannon Telephone conference call
re [redacted], and N.Korgaonkar about[redacted] (call andpreparation) 0.60
20-Jul-12 Brannon
Telephone conference call withteam
regarding Courtconference call 1.00
20-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team regarding Court call 0.30
20-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call with the Court 0.40
22-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to motion to extenddiscovery 1.80
22-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to 2nd motion tocompel 0.80
22-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails regarding [redacted] 0.30
23-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team re: [redacted] 0.50
23-Jul-12 Brannon Review discovery responses and review [redacted] 2.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 26
23-Jul-12 Brannon Attorney work product prepared [redacted[] 3.50
23-Jul-12 Brannon draft e-mail
and sent emails todefendants producingdocuments responsive toSOS discovery requests 2.20
23-Jul-12 Brannon Research [redacted] 1.50
23-Jul-12 Brannon
Review and revise draftdiscovery responses 1.50
23-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsletter regardingdiscovery responses 0.50
24-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith defendants aboutdiscovery responses 0.30
24-Jul-12 Brannon Review and revise draft compel 1.80
24-Jul-12 Brannon draft e-mailto litigation team aboutdiscovery documents 0.50
24-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails compel 2.10
25-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith defendants aboutdiscovery responses 0.30
25-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about next steps 0.30
25-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails with [redacted] 0.50
25-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team regarding next steps 1.00
26-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
relate to follow-upregarding documentproduction 0.50
26-Jul-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with client aboutdiscovery documents 0.10
26-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsdiscovery documentsand clients 0.10
27-Jul-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith Defendant aboutdocument production 0.80
1-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze
order from J. Wilkinsonregarding 2nd motion tocompel 0.30
2-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze draft DHH witness list 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 26
2-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [reacted] 0.50
3-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyzesupplement discoveryresponses from DCFS 0.50
3-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
emails with DCFScounsel aboutsupplemental discoveryresponses 0.60
3-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
about next steps fordrafting pre-trialstatement, SJ reply 0.50
3-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
about scheduling anddue dates for pre-trialstatement and counselconference 0.50
6-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze
communication Defensecounsel about DCFSsupplemental production 0.10
7-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyzedraft of oppn to motionto strike 0.40
8-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze
witness preparation chartfor DCFS related to pre-trial statement and trialpreparation. 0.60
8-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team related to [redacted] 1.10
8-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call [redacted] 0.50
9-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze draft witness chart 0.70
9-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with litigation team aboutproposed pre-trialschedule 0.20
10-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draftwitness chart about Plsfor pre-trial statements 0.20
10-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft
witness chart for DCFSwitnesses related to pre-trial statement and trialprep 0.60
10-Aug-12 Brannon Attorney work product
meeting with N. Shahabout witness chart forDCFS witness for pre-trial statement 0.30
10-Aug-12 Brannon Review various e-mails
from Defense Counselabout schedulingcounsel of conferenceand exchange of draftpre-trial statements 0.40
13-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft exhibit list 0.50
13-Aug-12 Brannon Draft
part of the DCFS witnesschart related to pre-trialstatement and trial prep 1.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 13 of 26
14-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about pre-trial statement 0.50
14-Aug-12 Brannon Attorney work product
followed-up with N. Shahabout confidential DCFSdocuments on exhibit list 0.40
14-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
about following-up withDefense counsel aboutscheduling pretrialconference of counsel 0.50
15-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith Fried Frank aboutexhibit list 0.40
15-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze
started review of Defs'oppn to motion forsummary judgment 0.80
15-Aug-12 Brannon Attorney work product
follow-up with Eric Sollieand N. Shah aboutexhibit list 0.40
15-Aug-12 Brannon Draft
email about the witnesslists for pre-trialstatement and sent to E.Sollie 0.50
16-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
about Defendants' oppnsto motion for judgment 1.00
16-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
about schedulingconference of counselfor PTO 0.50
17-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyzediscovery responsesfrom Defendants 1.20
17-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with PV staff aboutscope of discoveryresponses fromdefendants 0.40
17-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
scheduling conference ofcounsel for PTO wthdefendants 0.70
17-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze
emails about researchregarding discoveryresponses fromDefendants. 0.20
17-Aug-12 Brannon Draft letter
to court about schedulingof the conference ofcounsel for PTO 1.50
17-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith N. Korgaonkar[redacted] 0.50
17-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motion to strike 1.00
17-Aug-12 Brannon Research and prepare draft reply for sum. jud. 0.30
17-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyzeemail about assignmentsfor trial team 0.10
18-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motion to strike 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 14 of 26
18-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with PV staff aboutstructure of motion tostrike 0.60
18-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout edits to the replybrief 0.30
18-Aug-12 Brannon
Review and revise draft replymotion related to summ jud. 2.20
18-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails abou[redacted] 0.30
19-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with D. Ho about[redacted] 0.50
19-Aug-12 Brannon Draft reply motion related to summ. jud. 2.10
19-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft Motion to strike 2.50
19-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith N. Korgaonkarabout [rdeacted] 0.50
19-Aug-12 Brannon draft e-mailto M. Rupp and N. Shahabout [redacted] 0.30
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith N. Shahabout[redacted] 0.20
20-Aug-12 Brannon Draft email about [redacted] 0.40
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout exhibits to motionto strike 0.20
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze
edits to letter to courtabout schedulingconference of counsel;and sent same 0.20
20-Aug-12 Brannon Attorney work product
follow-up on researchregarding discoveryrelated to PTO 0.30
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyzeDCFS of reply summ.jud. 0.30
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze
DCFS email regardingconference of counselfor PTO 0.10
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyze draft motion to strike 0.40
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: motion to strike 0.70
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyzelatest draft of replyrelated to summ. jud. 0.30
20-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 0.50
20-Aug-12 Brannon Review various e-mails re: [redacted] 0.30
21-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 0.90
22-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails reply SJM 0.30
22-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motion to strike 1.50
22-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails strike 1.75
22-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about content of PTO 0.50
23-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails rely to motion to strike 0.10
23-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails reply sjm 0.50
23-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft reply sjm 2.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 15 of 26
24-Aug-12 Brannon Review and analyzeresearch regarding replysjm 1.50
24-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails prep for oral argument 0.20
24-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails exhibit reply sjm 0.50
24-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft reply sjm 2.20
24-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails rely sjm 1.50
25-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails declaration 0.10
26-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails reply sjm 0.50
26-Aug-12 Brannon Attorney work product re: declaration 0.30
26-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft reply sjm 1.30
27-Aug-12 Brannon Attorney work product declarations 0.40
27-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails declaration 0.20
27-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsfiling deadline for sjmreply 0.20
27-Aug-12 Brannon Research exhibits for reply sjm 0.50
27-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails exhibits for reply sjm 0.50
28-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team summ jud. (several calls) 2.00
28-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails exhibits to reply sjm 0.20
28-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails reply sjm 0.50
28-Aug-12 Brannon draft e-mailto defendants regardingpto 0.30
28-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsre communication withdefendants about pto 0.30
29-Aug-12 Brannon Review and revise draft reply sjm 2.50
29-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails reply sjm 1.50
30-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in preparation for oralargument 1.50
30-Aug-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument 1.50
31-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 1.00
31-Aug-12 Brannon draft e-mail
to R. Wilson aboutscheduling of conferenceof counsel for PTO 0.10
31-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
about motion to strikeoppns 0.50
31-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout filing of replyrelated to summ judg 0.10
31-Aug-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout oppn to motion tostrike 0.60
31-Aug-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants
response to motion tostrike 0.40
31-Aug-12 Brannon draft e-mailabout DCFS oppn tomotion to strike 0.20
31-Aug-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants
DCFS oppn to motion tostrike 0.20
31-Aug-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team oppn to motion to strike 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 16 of 26
2-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
regarding reply memo insupport of Plaintiffsmotion to strike and oralargument 0.50
2-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzemotion to strike replyexhibits filed by SOS 0.30
2-Sep-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument
re motion to strike andmotion for summaryjudgment 1.90
2-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draftreply memo in support ofPlaintiffs motion to strike 2.50
3-Sep-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument [redacted] 5.00
3-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to SOS motion tostrike reply exhibits 0.50
3-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draftreply in support ofPlaintiffs motion to strike 0.80
3-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding SOS motion tostrike reply exhibits 0.20
3-Sep-12 Brannon Attorney work productregarding oral argumentschedule and details 0.30
3-Sep-12 Brannon Draft motionrequesting oral argumenton motion to strike 0.50
3-Sep-12 Brannon Attorney work product
filed request for oralargument on motion tostrike 0.20
3-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding filing oppn toSOS surreply 0.10
4-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draftoppn to surreply filed bySOS 0.50
4-Sep-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument motion to strike 2.30
4-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout filing oppn tosurreply 0.20
4-Sep-12 Brannon travel time
travel to New Orleans forsumm judgment oralargument 5.50
4-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyze surreply filed by SOS 0.40
4-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding all plaintiffsfilings for today 0.20
5-Sep-12 Brannon Attend court conferencere: motion to strike andsumm. 1.00
5-Sep-12 Brannon Attend court conference
after motion forsummary judgment todiscuss next steps. 2.30
5-Sep-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument re: motion to strike 2.50
6-Sep-12 Brannon travel timefrom motion forsummary judgment 5.10
7-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeemail from D. Ho about[redacted] 0.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 17 of 26
7-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
about SOS commentsabout possiblesettlement discussions 0.50
7-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mails about exhibit list 0.10
7-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mails
and attachment from FFre: on-going violations vsother violations forpotential settlement 0.40
7-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzedraft section regardinglaw for PTO 0.70
7-Sep-12 Brannon Draft proposed injunction 4.00
7-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout scheduling DCFScaseworkers depo 0.20
7-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeemail from FF re SOSsettlement discussions 0.10
8-Sep-12 Brannon Draft proposed injunction 3.50
8-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout proposedinjunction and next steps 0.10
9-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsabout facts section forPTO 0.20
9-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeemail from D. Ho about[redacted] 0.20
10-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout schedulingcaseworker depositions 0.20
10-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with E. Sollie aboutdepositions of caseworkers 0.40
10-Sep-12 Brannon Attorney work product
follow-up and review e-mails about getting alldiscovery documents toFF for printing exhibits 0.70
10-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with co-counsel aboutpotential settlementdiscussions withdefendants - 0.80
10-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with E. Sollie and D. Hoabout depositions ofcaseworkers 0.20
10-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 1.00
11-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding printing trialexihibits 0.50
12-Sep-12 Brannon Prepare for depositions of L. Scott case workers 2.50
12-Sep-12 Brannon travel timeto New Orleans fordepositions 5.50
12-Sep-12 Brannon Attend meetingdeposition ofcaseworkers 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 18 of 26
13-Sep-12 Brannon travel time
travel from New Orleansafter depositions ofcaseworkers 5.10
13-Sep-12 Brannon Conduct depositionsof L. Scott case workersand prepared in morning 3.70
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft
letter to defendantsregarding additionalexhibits 0.30
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft pre-trial order 1.50
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails schedule 0.50
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
regardingcommunication /wdefendants aboutscheduling 1.50
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsdocuments related totrial exhibits 1.10
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails additional exhibits 0.20
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails trial prep; pre-trial order 0.70
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails DCFS trial exhibits 0.80
14-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails all trial exhibits 1.20
15-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft proposed pre-trial order 3.75
15-Sep-12 Brannon Draft
letter to defendantsregarding additionalexhibits 0.30
15-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsfrom Defendants aboutPTO and exhibits 0.50
15-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsproducing additionaldocuments 0.50
15-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeadditional documents forexhibits 1.20
15-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: pto 1.50
15-Sep-12 Brannon Attorney work productmail additional exhibitsto Defendants 0.50
16-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft proposed pre-trial order 4.75
16-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsregarding PTO andschedule 1.00
17-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsrelated to motions inlimine 0.20
17-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft proposed pre-trial order 6.70
17-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout trial exhibits fromDefendants 0.30
17-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeSOS portions of the pre-trial brief 0.50
17-Sep-12 Brannon Attorney work productcite checked DCFS factsof pretrial brief 1.70
17-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about the post trial brief 1.20
17-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails pre-trial insert from DHH 0.20
17-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call regarding PTO 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 19 of 26
18-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about next steps 1.00
18-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft
oppn to SOS motion forin-person pretrialconference 0.70
18-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeDCFS proposed trialexhibits 1.50
18-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyze motion [redacted] 0.50
18-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
about SOS motion forinperson pre-trialconference 0.60
18-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.40
18-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeSoS proposed inserts topre-trial brief 0.70
18-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsDCFS proposed pre-trialinserts 0.90
19-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
regarding met andconfer with Defendantsabout PTO 1.00
19-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draftlist of objections to[redacted] 0.70
19-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft pre-trial order 4.50
20-Sep-12 Brannon Attend meeting
conference call withDefendants about PTOand preparation 6.00
21-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call regarding PTO 0.50
21-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft PTO 3.60
21-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails pto 2.70
21-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsfrom defense counselregarding PTO 0.50
22-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails PTO 2.50
22-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsand edits fromdefendants re: PTO 0.50
22-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft pto 3.50
23-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft PTO 4.30
23-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about PTO 2.50
23-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsand edits fromDefendants re: PTO 1.80
24-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft letter to court 0.10
24-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about letter to court 0.50
24-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft PTO 1.40
24-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsand proposed edits fromdefendants about PTO 0.50
24-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith defendantsregarding PTO 1.50
24-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about pto 2.50
25-Sep-12 Brannon Review and analyzeproposed findings of factand law 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 20 of 26
25-Sep-12 Brannon Attorney work productreview materials abouttrial witnesses 0.50
25-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about trial witnesses 0.50
25-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsproposed findings offacts and law 0.50
25-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 1.00
25-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about PTO 0.50
25-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails letter to court 0.50
25-Sep-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team 1.00
26-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails deposition designations 0.30
26-Sep-12 Brannon
Prepare for telephoneconference call regarding trial witnesses 1.50
26-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails timing of next steps 0.20
26-Sep-12 Brannon Draft letterabout depositiondesignations 0.50
26-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails trial prep as to witnesses 0.50
26-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsletter to SOS aboutdeposition designations 0.30
27-Sep-12 Brannon Attend court conference pre-trial conference 1.40
27-Sep-12 Brannon Attend meeting
conferred with litigationteam about next stepsfollowing pre-trialconference 0.50
27-Sep-12 Brannon travel time 5.10
28-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails proposed injunction 0.50
28-Sep-12 Brannon travel time 6.10
28-Sep-12 Brannon Review and revise draft injunction 1.50
28-Sep-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsproposed findings of factand law 0.50
28-Sep-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsscheduling PTO follow-up 0.20
1-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial preparation work 5.50
1-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about trial 0.90
1-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with Defendants aboutPTO 0.50
2-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial preparations 6.50
2-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about trial 1.20
3-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team trial exhibits 0.30
3-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with Court and J. Lofflerabout trial exhibits 0.20
3-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial preparation 7.50
4-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product preparation for trial 6.50
5-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial preparation work 7.50
6-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial prep 6.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 21 of 26
7-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial preparation 9.50
8-Oct-12 Brannon travel timeto New Orleans for[redacted] 4.00
8-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productprepared for and meetwith [redacted] 4.00
8-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about witness and trial 1.00
8-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about witness lists 0.40
8-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product
follow-up on trial prep byPV paraglegal S.Khan,include [redacted] 0.20
8-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout edits to motions inlimine 1.20
8-Oct-12 Brannon Review and revise draft motions in limine 1.50
8-Oct-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsabout filing of motions inlimine 0.20
9-Oct-12 Brannon Review various e-mails about witness lists 0.30
9-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith PV staff about trialprep tasks 0.50
9-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding testimony by[redacted[l 0.50
9-Oct-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants
all motions in limine filedby defendants 1.50
9-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productprepared for and meetwith [redacted 3.50
9-Oct-12 Brannon travel timereturn from New Orleansafter witness prep 5.30
9-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails abou [redacted] 0.40
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyze proposed stipulation 0.50
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout SOS proposedstipulation 0.50
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails SOS 0.40
10-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
about SOS proposedstipulation and motionsin limine 0.50
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review various e-mails about [redacted] 0.20
10-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with D. Ho about[redacted] 0.30
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted[ 0.30
10-Oct-12 Brannon Draftwitness examinationoutlines 1.40
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.50
10-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productreviewed witnessexamination outlines 1.20
10-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product list 0.10
10-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product [redacted] 0.80
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyzedraft supplemental filing[redacted] 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 22 of 26
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout filing regarding[redacted] 0.40
10-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product worked on [redacted] 0.70
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyzedraft oppn to motion inlimine 1.20
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout witness list andexhibit list 0.50
10-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product reviewed exhibit list 0.50
10-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyze motion filed by SOS 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productreviewed witnessexamination outlines 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attend meetingrelated to preparingwitness examination 3.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and revise draft oppn to motion in limine 1.20
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.30
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productworked on trial prep[redacted 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout oppn to judicialnotice motion 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and revise draft oppn to judicial notice 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productabout order trialtranscripts 0.20
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productabout process server[redacted] 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout edits to oppn tomotion in limine 1.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product
follow-up on organizingfiles for travel to NOLAfor trial 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about propose stipulation 0.40
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyze proposed stipulation 0.20
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product finalized trial exhibit list 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about exhibit list 0.50
11-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productdrafted witnessexamination outlines 2.50
12-Oct-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team
regarding trialpreparation 1.00
12-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.20
12-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout handling of finalexhibit list 0.20
12-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about [redacted] 0.20
12-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about final witness lists 0.30
12-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails stipulation 0.30
12-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyzeedits to proposedstipulation 0.10
12-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productworked on trial prep[redacted] 0.50
12-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about trial transcripts 0.10
12-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial prep - [redacted] 5.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 23 of 26
12-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product
prep for witnessexamination of DCFSwitnesses 5.50
13-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work producttrial prep, including[redacted[ 3.50
13-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work producttrial prep related toDCFS witnesses 3.25
13-Oct-12 Brannon travel time 5.00
14-Oct-12 Brannon Prepare for oral argument re: motions in limine 3.50
14-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productprep for examination ofDCFS witnesses 2.50
14-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial prep - [redacted] 8.50
15-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productprep for examination ofDCFS witness next day 1.75
15-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work producttrial prep - prepared forDCFS witnesses 2.75
15-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product
prep for [[redacted]attended andparticipated in trial 8.50
15-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product witness prep r[redacted] 2.50
16-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product
trial - 8:00 am till 5:15,1.5 for lunch, plus trialprep for the day 9.50
16-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productprepared for potentialDCFS witnesses 2.25
17-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product prep for DCFS witnesses 0.40
17-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product attended trial and prep 3.75
17-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product trial prep [redacted] 1.10
19-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyze email about [redacted] 0.10
19-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyzeemail form D. Ho aboutpost trial brief 0.10
19-Oct-12 Brannon travel timefrom New Orleans aftertrial 3.90
21-Oct-12 Brannon Review and analyzeemails from co-counselabout [redacted] 0.20
23-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
with co-counsel aboutmotion to amend casecaption 0.10
23-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith co-counsel abouttrial transcripts 0.20
24-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productreviewed and worked onoutline for post trial brief 0.50
25-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productreviewed and worked onpost trial brief 0.70
25-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails trial transcripts 0.10
25-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails changing case caption 0.10
25-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsregarding motion toadmit facts 0.30
26-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails changing case caption 0.10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 24 of 26
26-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsabout filing motion toadmit facts 0.20
26-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.40
26-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails trial transcripts 0.10
26-Oct-12 Brannon Review and revise draft post trial brief 0.80
27-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work product call to [readcted] 0.10
27-Oct-12 Brannon Attorney work productdiscussion with M. Ruppabout [redacted] 0.30
27-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsre: corrections to trialtranscript 0.10
27-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails
re: memorandum foradmissions of disputesfacts from Def. earlyfilings 0.70
27-Oct-12 Brannon Review and revise draft post-trial brief 0.50
29-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.80
29-Oct-12 Brannon Review and revise draft post-trial brief 0.80
29-Oct-12 Brannon Research post trial brief 0.50
30-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about post trial brief 0.30
30-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about trial transcripts 0.10
31-Oct-12 Brannon Draftand edited portions ofthe post-trial brief 2.40
31-Oct-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails about post trial brief 0.30
1-Nov-12 Brannon Attorney work productreviewed proposed[redacted] 0.10
1-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailswith litigation team aboutpost trial brief 0.40
1-Nov-12 Brannon Draftand edited portions ofthe post trial brief 0.20
1-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.10
2-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [reacted] 0.10
2-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.30
4-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.10
8-Nov-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team re: post trial brief 1.30
8-Nov-12 Brannon Review and analyze draft of post trial brief 0.40
9-Nov-12 Brannon Review and revise draft post trial brief 0.20
9-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [readcted] 0.10
9-Nov-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call
with M. Rupp regarding[redacted] 0.40
9-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mailsre: filing case captionchange 0.20
9-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails re: post trial brief 0.20
12-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.40
12-Nov-12 Brannon Review and revise draft post trial brief 0.80
13-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails trial transcripts 0.10
13-Nov-12 Brannon Review and revise draft case caption motion 0.10
13-Nov-12 Brannon Review and analyze [redacted] 0.60
13-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 25 of 26
14-Nov-12 Brannon Review and analyze [redacted 0.60
14-Nov-12 Brannon Review various e-mails case caption motion 0.10
14-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.20
15-Nov-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference call re: post trial brief 0.50
15-Nov-12 Brannon Review and revise draft post trial brief 1.00
15-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.50
16-Nov-12 Brannon Review and revise draft post trial brief 1.20
16-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails post trial brief 0.50
19-Nov-12 Brannon Review various e-mails filing post trial brief 0.10
20-Nov-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants re: case caption 0.10
20-Nov-12 Brannon Review various e-mailsfiling related to casecaption 0.10
22-Nov-12 Brannon
Telephone conference call withteam about post trial brief 0.50
27-Nov-12 Brannon Attorney work product [redacted] 0.40
27-Nov-12 Brannon
Review and analyze filing bydefendant/defendants
evidence in post trialbrief 0.20
27-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.20
28-Nov-12 Brannon
Participate in telephoneconference with litigation team about [redacted] 0.70
29-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.50
29-Nov-12 Brannon Draft [redacted] 2.50
30-Nov-12 Brannon Review and exchange e-mails [redacted] 0.50
30-Nov-12 Brannon Review and revise draft [redacted] 1.20
total 702.1
89.7 of which is travel time
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-17 Filed 02/26/13 Page 26 of 26
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
EXHIBIT B - Nicole Zeitler Time Records
Date
Staff
name Task and description hours
1/3/2011 Zeitler
Review and draft retainer agreements for
individual and organizational plaintiffs. 1
1/3/2011 Zeitler
Review and draft letter to state notifying
of Section 7 violations [redacted] 1
1/3/2011 Zeitler
Conference call with [redacted] re: case
strategy. 0.5
1/4/2011 Zeitler [redacted] Attorney work product 0.5
1/4/2011 Zeitler Meeting with [redacted] litigation team 0.2
1/4/2011 Zeitler
Draft correspondence to [redact] re: co-
counsel agreement 0.1
1/4/2011 Zeitler Receipt and review of emails [redacted] 0.2
1/4/2011 Zeitler [redact] complaint drafting 0.2
1/4/2011 Zeitler
Tel conference [redact] re: development
of case 0.6
1/4/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of information sent
from DHH in response to request for
information [redacted] 2
1/4/2011 Zeitler
Draft correspondence [redact] litigation
team. 0.1
1/5/2011 Zeitler
Tel conference [redact] re: notice letter
and case development 0.4
1/5/2011 Zeitler
multiple emails to [redact]; [redact];
and [redact] re: notice letter and
meetings re: same. 0.5
1/11/2011 Zeitler Receipt and review of email [redact] 0.5
1/11/2011 Zeitler Draft correspondence[redact] 0.2
1/18/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email
correspondence [redact] 0.2
2/2/2011 Zeitler Receipt and review of email [redact] 0.3
2/3/2011 Zeitler
Correspondence to and from [redact]
litigation team re: meetings with client
and case strategy 0.4
2/4/2011 Zeitler
Correspondence to and from [redact] re:
meetings with client and timeline. 0.3
2/7/2011 Zeitler
Telephone call to Cecilia Cangelosi re:
SOS response to letter and draft
correspondence to [redact] re: same 0.2
2/8/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: call to C.
Cangelosis of SOS office. 0.1
2/9/2011 Zeitler Draft Complaint 0.4
2/9/2011 Zeitler
Participate in strategy conference calls
[redact] 1.1
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
2/9/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: strategy for
drafting of complaint and draft email
correspondence re: same 0.2
2/9/2011 Zeitler
Correspondence from [redact] re: plaintiff
correspondence and response thereto 0.2
2/9/2011 Zeitler
Draft correspondence to [redact] re:
efforts to connect with Office of Secretary
of State re: notice letter 0.1
2/10/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review correspondence
from[redact] enclosing draft of complaint
and review of same 0.4
2/10/2011 Zeitler [redact] complaint drafting 1.5
2/10/2011 Zeitler
Correspondence to C. Cangelosi -
response to her call 0.1
2/15/2011 Zeitler [redact] complaint drafting 0.3
2/16/2011 Zeitler [redact] complaint drafting 0.1
2/16/2011 Zeitler [redact] 1.5
2/17/2011 Zeitler Conf call with [redact] re: next steps 0.3
2/17/2011 Zeitler
Review emails from[redact] re: plaintiff
information 0.2
2/17/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: [redact] for
possible preliminary injunction motion 0.1
2/17/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: discovery [redact] 0.1
2/17/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] re: meeting with plaintiff
for facts for complaint 0.1
2/18/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of letter from SOS re:
response to notice letter and meeting
with[redact] re: same and draft
correspondence to [redact]and draft
correspondence to [redact] re: same and
receipt and review of responses
from[redact] 0.6
2/18/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: data from
survey in order to respond to letter from
SOS 0.6
2/18/2011 Zeitler
Draft emails to [redact] re: response to
SOS 0.2
2/18/2011 Zeitler
Draft letter in response to SOS reply to
notice letter 0.6
2/18/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] re: [redact]
responding to SOS reply to notice letter 0.5
2/18/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: [redact]
responding to SOS reply to notice letter 0.1
2/18/2011 Zeitler
Draft emails to[redact] re: information
from client surveys in order to draft
response to SOS reply to notice letter 0.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
2/22/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft response letter to
SOS,[redact] 3.5
2/22/2011 Zeitler Draft email [redact] 0.3
2/22/2011 Zeitler
Emails [redact] re: survey data including
phone surveys in order to drat response
to SOS 0.4
2/23/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing edits to draft letter and review
of enclosed and response thereto 0.3
2/23/2011 Zeitler
Draft emails and receipt and review of
emails from [redact] re: sending out SOS
response and content 0.3
2/23/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] Re: edits to
Complaint and draft email re: same 0.2
2/23/2011
Receipt and review of emails from
[redact] re: SOS reply and review of edits
and draft response 0.4
2/23/2011 Zeitler Email from [redact] re: response to SOS 0.1
2/24/2011 Zeitler
Meeting [redact] re: [redact] response to
SOS and draft email to [redact] re same 0.2
2/24/2011 Zeitler
Review benefits forms and other
information available on Louisiana
websites in order to draft complaints, and
multiple emails back and forth with
[redact] re: same and response to SOS 1.3
2/25/2011 Zeitler
Multiple emails back and forth with
[redact] re: response letter to SOS and
draft same 1.5
2/25/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: data and facts
and drafting complaint 0.4
2/28/2011 Zeitler
Emails[redact] for drafting complaint
[redact] 0.3
2/28/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re: timeline for
drafting complaint [redact] 0.3
3/1/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and forth with [redact] re:
meetings with clients 0.2
3/1/2011 Zeitler Call to Client and conference [redact] 0.2
3/2/2011 Zeitler Emails back and forth with[redact] 0.3
3/8/2011 Zeitler
Preparation for and meeting with [redact]
in preparation for drafting complaint and
to discuss facts of case. 1
3/18/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] requesting
information for purposes of drafting
compliant and receipt and review of
response email 0.2
3/18/2011 Zeitler Draft Complaint 5
3/19/2011 Zeitler Emails to and from [redact] re: complaint 0.3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
3/21/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: motion for
preliminary injunction 0.1
3/21/2011 Zeitler
Correspondence to [redact]enclosing
information from PV survey for purposes
of drafting complaint 0.1
3/21/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email
correspondence from [redact] 0.1
3/23/2011 Zeitler Travel to NOLA 4
3/23/2011 Zeitler
Visit DCFS and DHH offices in anticipation
of filing complaint 3
3/24/2011 Zeitler
Visit DCFS and DHH offices in anticipation
of filing complaint 4
3/25/2011 Zeitler
Visit DCFS and DHH offices in anticipation
of filing complaint 3.4
3/25/2011 Zeitler Travel from NOLA 4
4/1/2011 Zeitler Receipt and review of email [redact] 0.4
4/1/2011 Zeitler
Tel conference with [redact] re:
complaint draft 0.3
4/4/2011 Zeitler Continue to edit complaint 2
4/4/2011 Zeitler
email correspondence to and from
[redact] re: complaint 0.2
4/4/2011 Zeitler review of state election statutes [redact] 0.6
4/4/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email re: filing of
complaint [redact] 0.2
4/4/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of emails [redact] for
filing complaint and defendants 0.3
4/5/2011 Zeitler
Meeting [redact] and review of local rules
re: filing complaint and draft
correspondence [redact] 0.5
4/5/2011 Zeitler
Draft correspondence [redact] for filing
complaint and communicating with
clients. 0.1
4/5/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: filing
complaint [redact] 0.3
4/5/2011 Zeitler
Email [redact] enclosing letter to client
and response re: same 0.2
4/5/2011 Zeitler
Email [redact] enclosing draft complaint
and response thereto 0.2
4/6/2011 Zeitler
Conference call with co-counsel to discuss
strategy 1
4/6/2011 Zeitler
Meeting [redact]to discuss strategy for
discovery and preliminary injunction 0.5
4/6/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft motion for expedited
discovery 0.3
4/6/2011 Zeitler
Email [redact] re: timeline for filing
compliant [redact] 0.3
4/7/2011 Zeitler
Continue drafting motion for expedited
discovery 0.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
4/7/2011 Zeitler
Correspondence to [redact] enclosing
draft of motion for expedited discovery 0.1
4/7/2011 Zeitler Draft emails [redact] 0.4
4/7/2011 Zeitler Conference call [redact] 0.8
4/7/2011 Zeitler Meeting with [redact] 0.3
4/7/2011 Zeitler Emails [redact]re: discovery [redact] 0.3
4/7/2011 Zeitler Draft initial interrogatories to DCFS 4.5
4/8/2011 Zeitler
Email correspondence from [redact] re:
plaintiffs and response thereto 0.2
4/8/2011 Zeitler
Email correspondence from [redact]
enclosing client communication and
response thereto 0.2
4/8/2011 Zeitler conference with co-counsel re: [redact] 0.3
4/8/2011 Zeitler
Emails from and to [redact] re: finalizing
complaint 0.3
4/11/2011 Zeitler
Continue to finalize complaint including
meetings [redact] 3
4/11/2011 Zeitler
Conference call with [redact] re:
complaint and strategy 0.5
4/11/2011 Zeitler Emails to and from [redact] r: complaint 0.2
4/11/2011 Zeitler
Conference calls with [redact] re: survey
data for purposes of finalizing complaint 0.4
4/11/2011 Zeitler Continue to edit complaint 0.2
4/11/2011 Zeitler
Communication with [redact] for
purposes of finalizing complaint 0.1
4/12/2011 Zeitler
Conference call with [redact] re: filing of
complaint and motion for expedited
discovery 0.2
4/12/2011 Zeitler
Emails to [redact] and [redact] re: SNAP
application data in complaint 0.3
4/12/2011 Zeitler
Review of possible additional SNAP
application data [redact] for inclusion in
complaint 0.5
4/12/2011 Zeitler Email from [redact] re: filing of complaint 0.1
4/12/2011 Zeitler
Conference calls with [redact] re: data in
complaint 0.4
4/12/2011 Zeitler Work on Complaint 3
4/12/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] for purposes of
creating graphs and inputting information
on facts of case into complaint 2
4/12/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re: client and filing
compliant 0.3
4/13/2011 Zeitler
Phone conference with [redact] re:
motion for expedited discovery 0.1
4/13/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: [redact]
preliminary injunction motion 0.3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
4/13/2011 Zeitler Conf call with [redact] 0.2
4/13/2011 Zeitler Emails to [redact] 0.3
4/14/2011 Zeitler
Legal research in preparation for motion
for expedited discovery 0.7
4/14/2011 Zeitler Conference call with [redact] 1
4/15/2011 Zeitler Conf calls with [redact] 0.7
4/17/2011 Zeitler Conf call with [redact] 0.4
4/18/2011 Zeitler Continue to work on complaint - [redact] 0.4
4/18/2011 Zeitler Emails and calls with [redact] 0.9
4/19/2011 Zeitler conf call with co-counsel [redact] 0.6
4/19/2011 Zeitler
Emails, calls, to co-counsel and final
review of complaint prior to filing. 0.7
4/19/2011 Zeitler
Draft notice of 30(b)(6) deposition of
DCFS 0.4
4/20/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re: filing of
complaint and review of filed documents
and email [redact] 0.5
4/20/2011 Zeitler Receipt and review of email from [redact] 0.3
4/20/2011 Zeitler Emails to and from co-counsel [redact] 0.4
4/25/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing receipt of summons 0.1
4/25/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: motion to expedite discovery; edit
motion; draft responses thereto 0.6
4/25/2011 Zeitler
Review of preliminary injunction hearing
transcript from case involving similar
claims for purpose of properly drafting
discovery requests in preparation for
motion for preliminary injunction 2.4
4/26/2011 Zeitler Conf call with co-counsel [redact] 0.5
4/26/2011 Zeitler
Email correspondence from [redact] re:
discovery timelines and response thereto 0.2
4/26/2011 Zeitler Continue to edit interrogatories to DCFS 1
4/27/2011 Zeitler Emails from [redact] 0.2
4/27/2011 Zeitler
Draft letter to opposing counsel RE;
expedited discovery and draft email to
[redact] 0.7
4/27/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: correspondence
to opposing counsel re: expedited
discovery 0.1
4/27/2011 Zeitler Continue to draft interrogatories to DCFS 1
4/27/2011 Zeitler
Draft Requests for Admission to DCFS and
meet with [redact] re: same 1.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
4/28/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: additional edits to interrogatories to
DCFS and draft additional edits and draft
email response to [redact] re: same 0.4
4/28/2011 Zeitler
Draft requests for production of
documents to DCFS 0.7
5/4/2011 Zeitler Emails from [redact] 0.2
5/4/2011 Zeitler
Draft notice of 30(b)(6) deposition for
DCFS 0.5
5/6/2011 Zeitler
Conference call with [redact] re:
[redact] expedited discovery 0.4
5/6/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: upcoming
magistrate conference and response re:
same 0.3
5/6/2011 Zeitler
Emails re: discovery and upcoming
conference with magistrate with [redact]. 0.3
5/9/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: magistrate conference. 0.1
5/9/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] re: conference
with court and next steps. 0.3
5/9/2011 Zeitler
receipt and review of emails from
[redact] re: letter to o/c and next steps 0.2
5/10/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of orders by the court
granting Def motion for additional time to
answer and docket entry re: status
conference 0.2
5/10/2011 Zeitler Call to Client [redact] 0.1
5/10/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] re: letter to o/c
re: discovery schedule 0.1
5/10/2011 Zeitler
Conference with [redact] re: letter to o/c
re: discovery schedule 0.1
5/10/2011 Zeitler
Participate in conference call with Client
[redact] 0.3
5/10/2011 Zeitler Edit letter to o/c re: discovery schedule 0.4
5/10/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
to client [redact] 0.1
5/10/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] enclosing edits to
letter to O/C re: discovery timeline 0.1
5/16/2011 Zeitler
Emails from and to [redact] re: next
steps 0.2
5/16/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft Request for Admission
to SOS 0.3
5/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails to [redact] re: next steps :
request for meeting and confer with o/c
and responses thereto 0.4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
5/19/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] re: strategy for
discussions with o/c re: meet and confer 0.2
5/20/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of correspondence
from o/c re: request for meet and confer
and emails back and forth with [redact]
re: same and review of edits from
[redact] re: 30(b)(6) notice of deposition
to SOS and draft email re: same and set
meeting with co-counsel [redact] 0.6
5/23/2011 Zeitler
Prepare for strategy call with co-counsel
re: next steps in talks with o/c and meet
with [redact] 0.8
5/23/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: meet and confer with o/c and draft
response thereto 0.2
5/23/2011 Zeitler
Draft initial 26(a)(1) and 26(f) disclosures
and research related thereto 2.5
5/23/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: draft of
disclosures; meetings with [redact] re:
same 0.3
5/23/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of motion to enroll and
motion to enroll and substitute lead
counsel and order from court granting
motion to enroll Amy Colby as lead
counsel 0.3
5/24/2011 Zeitler prepare for 26(f) conference with o/c 0.4
5/24/2011 Zeitler Participate in 26(f) conference with o/c 0.5
5/24/2011 Zeitler
Conference call with co-counsel re:
strategy and next steps re: 26(f)
submission 0.6
5/25/2011 Zeitler
Conference call with [redact] re: 26(f)
submission and strategy 0.2
5/25/2011 Zeitler Draft 26(f)submission 2
5/26/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing draft 26(f) submission and
continue to edit draft and emails to
[redact] re: same 0.6
5/26/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: 26(f) submission and call to o/c and
draft response to same 0.2
5/27/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of correspondence
from C. Cangeliosi and draft
correspondence to co-counsel [redact] 0.5
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: draft 26(f)
submission [redact] 0.7
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: case law and
strategy for conference with court 0.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Tel calls with [redact] re: 26(f)
submission 0.4
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Tel calls with [redact] re: 26(f)
submission 0.4
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: 26(f)
submission 0.5
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email
correspondence sent by C. Cangeliosi and
receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: same and respond to same 0.3
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Tel call with [redact] re: response to
Cangelosi issues re: 26(f) submission and
email to and from [redact] re: same 0.4
5/31/2011 Zeitler
Review and analysis of May 26 letter from
SOS and [redact] draft response letter
requesting information 3.3
6/1/2011 Zeitler
Review of case law in preparation for
Monday conference with court and
participation in conference with co-
counsel re: strategy 1.5
6/1/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft response to o/c re:
documents 1.2
6/1/2011 Zeitler
Review of email from Cangelosi enclosing
drafts of 26(f) and draft email to [redact]
re: same 0.4
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] re: communication with
clients and receipt and review of response
thereto 0.2
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of edits to May 26
response [redact] 0.3
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] issue raised in
briefing 0.2
6/2/2011 Zeitler
emails from [redact] re: 26(f) submission
and letter to counsel and response to
same 0.3
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: letter to o/c in
response to May 26 letter and receipt and
review of response thereto 0.2
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: status of discovery requests and draft
email re: same and receipt and review of
response 0.3
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Emails re: Request for Admission to DCFS
and edit same in light of May 26 letter 0.5
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of DCFS Motion to
Withdraw counsel 0.1
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of motion to dismiss
filed by DCFS and draft email to [redact]
Re; same 0.5
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of DHH motion and
filed papers relating to motion to dismiss
and meetings with [redact] 1.5
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of emails from
[redact] and C Cangelosi re: 26(f)
submission 0.2
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Draft edits to correspondence to SOS re:
response to May 26 letter [redact] 0.7
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Edit discovery requests to update
information provided by SOS in May 26
letter and draft email to [redact] re:
same 1
6/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of motion to dismiss
filed by SOS and meeting with [redact] 1
6/3/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of emails and
meetings with [redact] re: filing of
complaint and review of final draft of
complaint 0.8
6/3/2011 Zeitler Participation in conference call [redact] 0.8
6/3/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] for the purpose of
drafting set of discovery for DHH and
creating draft of response to motion to
dismiss 0.5
6/3/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of final drafts of
discovery documents for DCFS from
[redact] and draft final edits and
correspondence [redact] 0.7
6/6/2011 Zeitler
Legal research [redact]; development of
argument and preparation for 26(f)
conference with the magistrate judge,
emails and meetings with [redact] re:
same 3
6/6/2011 Zeitler
Participation in conference with
magistrate judge 1
6/6/2011 Zeitler
Participation in conference call with co-
counsel [redact] 0.5
6/6/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: next steps for
complying with orders from court an
discovery and motions 0.3
6/6/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: strategy
and discovery next steps 0.3
6/6/2011 Zeitler Draft discovery requests to DHH 1.5
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
6/6/2011 Zeitler
Research [redact]in order to response to
issues raised by C. Cangelosi during
conference in anticipation of settlement
conference and issues related to discovery 0.5
6/7/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meetings re: discovery going
forward 1
6/8/2011 Zeitler
Tel conference [redact] re: conversation
with opposing counsel [redact] 0.4
6/8/2011 Zeitler Meeting with [redact] [re: settlement] 0.4
6/8/2011 Zeitler
Multiple emails, phone calls, and drafting
of edited discovery requests 1
6/8/2011 Zeitler Finalize discovery 3
6/8/2011 Zeitler
Tel conference with C. Cangelosi re:
notice of submission date and settlement
possibilities 0.3
6/9/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: research
[redact] 0.3
6/9/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing [redact] [research]. 0.2
6/9/2011 Zeitler
Call to A. Colby re: notice of submission
date 0.1
6/9/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing draft of RFA for DHH and edit
same and draft email response re: same 0.4
6/9/2011 Zeitler
Call to D. Cade re: notice of submission
date 0.1
6/10/2011 Zeitler
Tel conference with [redact] re: next
steps and discovery 0.2
6/10/2011 Zeitler DCFS Discovery 2.5
6/10/2011 Zeitler DHH Discovery 2.5
6/13/2011 Zeitler
Conference with [redact] re: motion for
extension 0.1
6/13/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: extension motion 0.1
6/13/2011 Zeitler
Participation in conference call with
Mediator 0.5
6/13/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] legal research
[redact] 2.5
6/14/2011 Zeitler
conference call with [redact] re: next
steps an documents sent by state. 1
6/15/2011 Zeitler
Draft section on [redact] in response to
defendant motion to dismiss 2
6/15/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact], [redact], and
[redact] re: legal research in order to
draft response to motion to dismiss 1
6/15/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and forth with [redact] re:
motion to continue 0.4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
6/16/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of order from court
setting status conference. 0.1
6/16/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: status of
motion 0.1
6/21/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meetings and draft letter to
o/c 1.5
6/21/2011 Zeitler
Draft reply to D's opposition to P's motion
to continue 1.5
6/22/2011 Zeitler Emails and calls re: reply brief 0.5
6/22/2011 Zeitler Call with court 0.3
6/22/2011 Zeitler Conf call with co-counsel [redact] 0.7
6/22/2011 Zeitler
Numerous emails and calls re: letter to
court re: discovery and send same
message 2.3
6/23/2011 Zeitler Emails and meetings re: letter to court 0.5
6/23/2011 Zeitler response motion, calls, meeting 5
6/23/2011 Zeitler Draft settlement proposal 3
6/24/2011 Zeitler
Emails from C. Cangelosi re: letter to
court and emails to and from co-counsel
and calls re: same 1
6/24/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of minute order from
court and email from co-counsel re: same 0.3
6/27/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of scan of letter from
DCFS to clients and emails and calls re:
same 1.5
6/27/2011 Zeitler
Emails from C. Cangelosi re: extension
and emails and calls with Co-counsel re:
same 0.5
6/28/2011 Zeitler
Calls with co-counsel and emails re:
discovery 0.6
6/28/2011 Zeitler Email from A. Colby 0.1
6/29/2011 Zeitler Emails [redact] [discovery] 0.7
6/29/2011 Zeitler Legal research [redact] 2.5
6/29/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of objections from
DCFS 0.4
6/29/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of objections from
DHH 0.4
6/30/2011 Zeitler Draft response to motion to dismiss 4
6/30/2011 Zeitler Receipt of motion to extend 0.1
6/30/2011 Zeitler Receipt of motion to extend 0.1
6/30/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of motion for time to
extend 0.1
7/6/2011 Zeitler
Preparation for settlement negotiations
with Defendants 1.5
7/6/2011 Zeitler
participation in settlement negotiation
with defendants and conference with
plaintiffs counsel re: same 1.5
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
7/12/2011 Zeitler
Participation in conf call with [redact] re:
preparation for settlement conference. 1.3
7/13/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with co-counsel regarding
strategy and meeting [redact] 0.5
7/13/2011 Zeitler
Work on Settlement draft and emails back
and forth with co-counsel re: same and
draft email enclosing proposal to
Defendants 0.5
7/13/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] re: strategy for
settlement 0.3
7/14/2011 Zeitler
Travel to New Orleans for Negotiation -
TRAVEL 4
7/14/2011 Zeitler Travel to and attend meeting with clients 2.5
7/14/2011 Zeitler
Discuss case and strategy meetings with
co-counsel in preparation for negotiation
and status conference with judge 2.5
7/15/2011 Zeitler
Preparation for and participation in
settlement negotiations with opposing
counsel 4
7/15/2011 Zeitler
Preparation for and participate in status
conference with judge and debrief
afterward for purpose of strategy 1.5
7/15/2011 Zeitler
TRAVEL to BWI from negotiations meeting
- TRAVEL 5
7/18/2011 Zeitler
Draft changes to settlement proposal
following negotiations. 2.4
7/18/2011 Zeitler
Email from D. Cade Re; initial disclosures
agreement and response thereto 0.2
7/18/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from C.
Cangelosi re: EAC contact for purposes of
settlement and response thereto and draft
email to co-counsel re: same 0.3
7/25/2011 Zeitler Conf call with [redact] [re:] discovery 0.5
7/25/2011 Zeitler
Review of order on discovery motions
from Magistrate for the purpose of
redrafting discovery requests per the
order and redraft discovery 0.9
7/25/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to co-counsel enclosing re-
drafted discovery requests and receipt
and review of email re: same 0.2
7/25/2011 Zeitler
Receipt of voicemail from A. Colby re:
proposed meeting and call A. Colby re:
same 0.2
7/26/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] and draft email to
[redact] re: strategy meeting 0.5
7/26/2011 Zeitler Conf call with Co-counsel [redact] 0.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 13 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
7/26/2011 Zeitler
Multiple emails back and forth with co-
counsel re: revisions to discovery and
draft revisions 0.5
7/26/2011 Zeitler
Emails from Defendants re: proposed next
negotiation time and confer with co-
counsel re: same and draft response
email to Defendants re: same 0.4
7/26/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re: meeting with
Client 0.2
7/26/2011 Zeitler
Tel conference with A. Colby re: proposed
meeting and call [redact] re: same and
send email to [redact] re: same 0.3
7/27/2011 Zeitler
Continue to revise discovery and draft
email to Defendants enclosing revisions in
discovery and draft emails to co-counsel
re: same 0.7
8/1/2011 Zeitler
Emails from C. Cangelosi re: email and
sent interrogatories and responses to
same and emails back and forth with
[redact] re: same 0.4
8/1/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: client
calls [redact] 0.4
8/1/2011 Zeitler
Emails and calls back and forth with
[redact] re: initial disclosures [redact] 0.5
8/8/2011 Zeitler Preparation for negotiation with state 2
8/8/2011 Zeitler participate in negotiation with state 1.5
8/8/2011 Zeitler Post-call strategy with co-counsel 0.5
8/8/2011 Zeitler Email screenshots of Medicaid to [redact] 0.1
8/9/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
deposition notices 0.3
8/9/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of DHH Responses to
RFA 0.2
8/9/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of SOS Responses to
RFA 0.2
8/10/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and forth with [redact] re:
discovery strategy 0.4
8/10/2011 Zeitler
Review of responses to RFAs and other
documents produced by defendants and
draft notices of deposition 2.5
8/10/2011 Zeitler Tel call with Doug Cade re: discovery 0.1
8/11/2011 Zeitler
Email from and to [redact] re: discovery
strategy for depositions 0.2
8/11/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] and response re:
discovery 0.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 14 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
8/11/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email enclosing
response to documents request from C.
Cangelosi and draft email to [redact] re:
same 0.3
8/12/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and forth with [redact] re:
responses to requests for production and
receipt and review of responses for
requests for production 1.5
8/15/2011 Zeitler
Emails w [redact] re: discovery and
meeting with [redact] re: same 0.7
8/15/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from D.
McCay requesting discovery document
and draft response re: same 0.2
8/15/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] and [redact] re:
discovery 0.3
8/15/2011 Zeitler
Email to o/c re: time to meet for
resuming negotiations 0.1
8/15/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from D.
McCay requesting discovery document
and draft response re: same 0.2
8/15/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents and draft second
RFA to Def Johnson and Meeting re:
[redact] 2.5
8/15/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and forth with [redact] re:
discovery documents from SOS 0.4
8/16/2011 Zeitler
Email response from K. Humbles re:
negotiation meeting 0.1
8/16/2011 Zeitler
Review documents and draft outline for
discovery responses 0.7
8/16/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: discovery
strategy 0.2
8/16/2011 Zeitler
Conf call with [redact] re: discovery
strategy 0.6
8/16/2011 Zeitler
Draft documents and begin organization
of documents produced by defendants in
anticipation of further discovery and
emails to and from [redact] re; same 0.5
8/16/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing edits to RFA to DCFS and
continue to draft same 0.5
8/16/2011 Zeitler
Emails to [redact] and response there to
re: discovery from SOS 0.4
8/17/2011 Zeitler
Emails to [redact] re: discovery
preparation. 0.2
8/17/2011 Zeitler Draft deposition notice for DCFS 0.4
8/17/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of emails from
[redact] re: deposition notice for DCFS
and draft changes related to same 0.4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 15 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
8/17/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from C.
Cangelosi enclosing privilege log and
review of enclosure. 0.2
8/17/2011 Zeitler
Email from C. Cangelosi re: availability for
phone conference 0.1
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meeting with [redact] re:
deposition notices and attached discovery
documents 0.7
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: DCFS depo
notice and attached discovery requests
and strategy and current drafts and draft
email to [redact] re: same and receipt
and review of response thereto 1.5
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: discovery docs
from SOS and response thereto 0.2
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email [redact] re:
receipt of SOS docs [redact] 0.3
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: cataloguing of
discovery documents received from SOS
and emails re: same 0.4
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re: documents
produced by SOS [redact] 0.5
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: SOS
deposition notices 0.3
8/18/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: documents
produced by SOS 0.1
8/19/2011 Zeitler
Email and meetings with [redact] [re
discovery] 0.5
8/19/2011 Zeitler
Review of all DCFS documents produced
[redact] 5
8/19/2011 Zeitler
Emails from and to [redact] re:
documents produced by DCFS 0.4
8/19/2011 Zeitler Review of DHH documents [redact] 1.4
8/22/2011 Zeitler Email [redact] re: discovery review. 0.1
8/22/2011 Zeitler
Review of all DCFS documents produced
and draft summary of relevance and draft
strategy for use in upcoming depositions 6
8/22/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of privilege log from
SOS 0.2
8/22/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] [re discovery
summaries] 0.5
8/22/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of privilege log from
SOS 0.2
8/23/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
negotiations with the state 0.3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 16 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
8/23/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from C.
Cangelosi enclosing motion to transfer
and review of same and meeting with co-
counsel re: same and draft and receive
emails from co-counsel re: same and draft
[redact] 1.5
8/23/2011 Zeitler Email from [redact] re: deposition notices 0.1
8/23/2011 Zeitler
Continue review of all documents
produced by DCFS and draft outlines
[redact] 4.5
8/23/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: discovery review of DHH docs and
response re: same 0.2
8/24/2011 Zeitler
Draft SOS and DCFS deposition notices
and email [redact] re: same 0.8
8/24/2011 Zeitler Email from [redact] [depositions] 0.4
8/24/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and forth with [redact] and
meetings re: SOS deposition notices 0.6
8/24/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of motion to enroll as
counsel for Schedler 0.1
8/24/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents for purpose of
drafting SOS deposition notices and draft
email to [redact] 0.5
8/25/2011 Zeitler Email to o/c re: negotiation meeting 0.1
8/25/2011 Zeitler
Email from A. Colby re: negotiation
meeting and email to [redact] re: same 0.2
8/25/2011 Zeitler
Review of DCFS documents and review of
case law and state regulations for
purposes of preparing for depositions and
numerous emails to co-counsel re: same 3
8/26/2011 Zeitler
prep and participate in call with opposing
counsel and post-call with [redact] [co-
counsel] 1.5
8/26/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from C. Alexander re;docs
produced by Def Johnson 0.3
8/26/2011 Zeitler
Phone call with D. Cade re: documents
produced by DHH and emails to and from
[redact] re: same 0.3
8/29/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of motion to enroll as
counsel for Schedler 0.1
8/30/2011 Zeitler
Emails from and to [redact] re: discovery
drafts 0.4
8/30/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing revised depositions notices 0.3
8/30/2011 Zeitler
Participate in conf call with [redact] re:
discovery strategy 0.8
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 17 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
8/30/2011 Zeitler Meeting with [redact] re: discovery 0.2
8/30/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: discovery 0.1
8/30/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of emails [redact] re:
DHH doc review and review of enclosed
document outline 0.6
8/30/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing caseworker deposition notice
and attachments and review of same and
meeting with [redact] re: same 0.5
8/30/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] re: documents
produced by SOS and response thereto
and email re: same 0.3
8/30/2011 Zeitler
Email from C. Cangelosi re: documents
produced by SOS and emails to [redact] 0.5
8/31/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of lengthy emails and
strategy outlines from [redact] and draft
response and email to [redact] re: same 0.7
9/7/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to [redact] re: discovery and
response thereto 0.2
9/7/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: depositions and
response thereto 0.2
9/8/2011 Zeitler
Draft outline of plan [redact] [for
depositions] 2.4
9/8/2011 Zeitler Meetings with [redact] re: [research] 0.7
9/8/2011 Zeitler
Edits and meetings and emails re: edits to
DCFS deposition notices 0.5
9/8/2011 Zeitler Draft Greenstein RFP 0.4
9/9/2011 Zeitler TEL call with [redact] re: discovery 0.5
9/9/2011 Zeitler Emails re: depositions with [redact] 0.2
9/12/2011 Zeitler
Emails from and to [redact] re:
deposition notices and discovery and edit
notices and meetings re: same 1
9/12/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents and discovery
responses from DCFS and draft outline of
documents that we need and other
outlines for use in depositions 4.5
9/13/2011 Zeitler Emails re: discovery with [redact] 0.3
9/13/2011 Zeitler Participate in conf call with [redact] 1.5
9/14/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meetings with [redact] re:
Deposition notices and RFA and RFP for
DHH and draft edits to all 4
9/14/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re: deposition notice
for SOS and meeting with [redact] re:
same 0.4
9/14/2011 Zeitler SOS depo notice meetings and emails 0.3
9/15/2011 Zeitler Finalize DCFS deposition notices 0.8
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 18 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
9/15/2011 Zeitler
Calls with [redact] re: finalizing DHH
depo notices and review of drafts and
email for finalize. 0.5
9/16/2011 Call with [redact] re: deps 0.2
9/16/2011 Zeitler
Research [redact] and review of
documents produced by SOS and draft
updated discovery 3.5
9/16/2011 Zeitler Call Amy Colby re: deps 0.1
9/16/2011 Zeitler Call Celia Cangelosi re: deps 0.1
9/19/2011 Zeitler Emails to [redact] re: depos 0.2
9/19/2011 Zeitler
call from A. Colby re: deps and email to
[redact] re: same 0.2
9/19/2011 Zeitler call from C. Cangelosi re: deps 0.1
9/21/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing letter to DHH re: supplement
and emails to [redact] 0.4
9/22/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents produced by SOS
[redact] 3
9/23/2011 Zeitler
Numerous emails and calls with [redact]
re: depositions and meetings with
[redact] 1
9/23/2011 Zeitler
Continued review of documents from SOS
and draft summary of same for purposes
of discovery 4
9/23/2011 Zeitler
Review of options for deposition and
meeting with [redact] re: same [redact] 0.7
9/23/2011 Zeitler call to C. Cangelosi re: deps 0.1
9/26/2011 Zeitler conf call with [redact] 0.4
9/26/2011 Zeitler Email to A. Colby re: depos 0.1
9/26/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents produced by DCFS
and Draft letter to supplement and
meetings and emails with co-counsel re:
same 1.5
9/26/2011 Zeitler Tel call with C. Cangelosi 0.1
9/26/2011 Zeitler
Review of docs produced by SOS for
purposes of request to supplement; draft
request for supplement and emails and
meetings with co-counsel re: same 1
9/26/2011 Zeitler
Draft second request for admission to
SOS and emails to and from co-counsel
re: same 0.9
9/26/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Cangelosi enclosing letter re:
supplement 0.1
9/27/2011 Zeitler Tell call to [redact] re: deps 0.1
9/27/2011 Zeitler
Numerous emails re: Depositions and
meetings with [redact] re: same 0.5
9/27/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: depo strategy
and emails to [redact] re: same 0.4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 19 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
9/27/2011 Zeitler tel call with A Colby re: depos 0.3
9/27/2011 Zeitler
Draft letter to C. Cangelosi re: incomplete
interrogatories and email to [redact] and
meeting with [redact] re: same 0.9
9/27/2011 Zeitler
Draft email to C. Cangelosi enclosing
letter re: interrogatories 0.1
9/27/2011 Zeitler
Thorough review of EAC data produced by
SOS for purpose of drafting Second RFA
and draft of same 3
9/27/2011 Zeitler
Draft second RFP to SOS and emails to
and from [redact] re: same 1.6
9/28/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meeting [redact] re:
additional DCFS discovery and continue to
draft edits [redact] 1.2
9/28/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from A Colby re;
depositions 0.2
9/28/2011 Zeitler Emails from C. Cangelosi 0.1
9/29/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft additional discovery for
all defendants and emails and meetings
re: same 1
9/29/2011 Zeitler
Draft edits to RFA for DHH and meeting
with [redact] and email re: same 0.5
9/29/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] re: discovery to DHH
and response thereto 0.2
9/30/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft discovery request for all
defendants and meetings an emails re:
same 3
9/30/2011 Zeitler Email to o/c enclosing discovery 0.1
9/30/2011 Zeitler
Email from A. Colbly re: dcfs tech depo
and email to [redact] re: same 0.2
9/30/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents produced by SOS
and meeting with [redact] and email re:
same for purpose of discovery 0.8
9/30/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft discovery to SOS and
meetings and emails with [redact] re;
same 2.4
10/3/2011 Zeitler Calls with [redact] re: depositions 0.5
10/3/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
deposition prep work 0.3
10/3/2011 Zeitler [redact] [deposition prep] 1.5
10/3/2011 Zeitler Email to A. Colby re: depositions 0.1
10/4/2011 Zeitler Emails to and from [redact] re: depos. 0.2
10/4/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Cangelosi requesting discovery
requests in word format 0.1
10/5/2011 Zeitler Email from A. Colby re: depositions 0.1
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 20 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
10/5/2011 Zeitler
Review of materials to set SOS
depositions and send emails to [redact]
re; same 0.5
10/5/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents and determination
of deponents for SOS and draft email to
[redact] re: same 0.5
10/6/2011 Emails and meetings with [redact] 1
10/6/2011 Zeitler Meeting with [redact] 0.5
10/7/2011 Zeitler
Review of email from D. Cade re: DHH
discovery 0.1
10/7/2011 Zeitler
Receipt of email from C. Cangelosi
enclosing letter response and email to
[redact] re; same 0.2
10/7/2011 Zeitler
Receipt of email from C. Cangelosi
enclosing additional letter response and
email to [redact] re: same 0.2
10/10/2011 Zeitler
Emails from C. Cangelosi and emails with
[redact] re: same 0.4
10/11/2011 Zeitler
Email from and to [redact] re: response
to RFP 0.2
10/11/2011
Email from [redact] re: interrogatories
from SOS 0.1
10/11/2011 Zeitler Email to C. Cangelosi re: deps 0.1
10/11/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: SOS RFP and
responses thereto 0.2
10/11/2011 Zeitler
Email from C. Cangelosi re: depo schedule
and email to [redact] re; same 0.2
10/11/2011 Zeitler Draft interrogatory responses to SOS. 2.5
10/13/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: discovery prep
schedule and response thereto 0.2
10/13/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: depo docs 0.1
10/13/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
documents for production 0.4
10/13/2011 Zeitler
Send documents to [redact] for use in
production 0.4
10/13/2011 Zeitler Draft interrogatory responses to DCFS 8
10/14/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re; discovery
cutoffs and motions 0.4
10/14/2011 Zeitler
preparation for and participation in
meeting with [redact] re: deposition
prep 1
10/14/2011 Zeitler Meetings and emails with [redact] 0.7
10/14/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents and emails for
purposes of production 2.5
10/14/2011 Zeitler legal research [redact] 0.7
10/14/2011 Zeitler
Email to A. Colby re: depositions and
responses thereto and send email to
[redact] re: same 0.3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 21 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
10/14/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] enclosing DHH docs for
purpose of production 0.1
10/14/2011 Zeitler Email to C. Cangelosi re: deps 0.1
10/14/2011 Zeitler
Response email from C. Cangelosi re:
deposition schedule and draft response
thereto and emails to [redact] re: same 0.4
10/14/2011 Zeitler
Additional email from C. Cangelosi re:
schedule and emails to [redact] re:s ame 0.4
10/14/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] re: depo schedule and
resonse thereto and email to C. Cangelosi
and T. Joes re: same 0.3
10/17/2011 Zeitler [redact] preparation for depositions 3
10/17/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: call with D. Cade
setting dpost 0.1
10/17/2011 Zeitler
Draft response to interrogatories from
SOS 2.5
10/17/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from C. Cangelosi and
[redact] re: depositions schedule and
meeting re: same 0.5
10/17/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
scheduling for SOS depos 0.3
10/17/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Cangelosi re: meeting with
magistrate re: setting depos 0.1
10/17/2011 Zeitler
Emails with T. Jones and [redact] re:
scheduling 0.4
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Review of documents [redact] [and depo
prep] 4
10/18/2011 Zeitler
[redact] [depo prep] and draft outline for
tech depositions 3
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: notices of
depositions 0.3
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re:production of
documents from deponents 0.3
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Meeting and emails with [redact] re:
creating outlines for DCFS depos 0.5
10/18/2011 Zeitler Deposition prep 2
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails to [redact] re: DCFS failure to
supplemnet and responses thereto 0.4
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] enclosing draft
outlines for DCFS meeting re: same and
review same 0.5
10/18/2011 Zeitler Email from T. Jones re: depositions 0.1
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft interrogatory responses
to SOS and meeting with [redact] re:
same 3
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Emaisl from T. Jones re: depositions and
response thereto 0.3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 22 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Meeting and emails with [redact] re: SOS
deposition subpoenas 0.4
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: SOS
Subpoenas 0.3
10/18/2011 Zeitler Emails to T. Jones re; depo start 0.2
10/18/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and foth with [redact] re:
production to SOS and review of
documents re: same 0.7
10/19/2011 Zeitler Emails and calls with [redact] re privilege 0.5
10/19/2011 Zeitler Legal research [redact] 0.9
10/19/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: deposition notices 0.1
10/19/2011 Zeitler [redact] [depo prep] 2
10/19/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: outlines 0.1
10/19/2011 Zeitler Draft outlines for deposition prep 2
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Draft letter to DCFS re: failure to
supplemnet and multiple emails with
[redact] re: same 0.7
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Review of DCFS documents and draft
outlines for depositinos 2.5
10/19/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re; DCFS documents 0.1
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Email to A. Colby enclosing letter re:
supplement 0.1
10/19/2011 Zeitler Draft outline for tech deposition for DCFS 2
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] re: caseworker outlines
and response thereto 0.2
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
deposition notices and subpoenas for
production of documents 0.4
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: deposition
outlies 0.8
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] enclosing draft
outlines for caseworker deps and review
of same and meeting re: same 0.7
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Email from and to [redact] re:
deposiitons for DCFS 0.2
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Email to and from C. Alexander re:
supplemental production and draft email
to [redact] re: same 0.3
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Emails and calls with [redact] re:
prodcution to SOS 0.5
10/19/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and reiew of email from [redact]
enclosing draft rrogs to SOS and review of
same and response 0.8
10/20/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: deposition
notices and requests for production for
deponents 0.4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 23 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
10/20/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
depositions 0.3
10/20/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
re: deposition notices 0.1
10/20/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft outlines for deposition
drafts [redact] 3
10/20/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: privilege
log for production to SOS 0.3
10/20/2011 Zeitler
Continue to draft interrogatories to SOS
and review of documents in order to
complete same and have several
meetings with [redact] 2.5
10/20/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: discovery
for SOS and meetings re: same 0.6
10/21/2011 Zeitler [redact] preparing for Depos 2.5
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of notice of judge
change from court and emails and
meetings re: same 0.4
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: depositions and
email re: same with [redact] 0.6
10/21/2011 Zeitler Email from [redact] re: depo notices 0.1
10/21/2011 Zeitler Email to A. Colby re: tech depo 0.1
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Email to A. Colby enclosing final notices of
depositions 0.1
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: DHH
discovery 0.3
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Calls with and emails re: process server
for purpose of serving Elsie Cangelosi and
Donna Durand 0.7
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: interrogatories to
SOS 0.1
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meetings with [redact] re:
[redact] discovery for SOS 0.5
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Email to process server re: SOS service
and tel call re: same and email to
[redact] re: same 0.3
10/21/2011 Zeitler
Finalize SOS interrogatory responsonses
and emails to [redact] and meetings re:
same 2.5
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Emails to [redact] and receipt and review
of responses thereto re: strategy 0.3
10/24/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: depos 0.1
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Meeeting with [redact] re: notices of
deposition and documents 0.3
10/24/2011 Zeitler Email from A. colby re: depos 0.1
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Email to process server re: service on
Cangelosi and Durand and response
thereto 0.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 24 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meetings with [redact] re:
discovery responses to SOS 0.6
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Continue to finalize discovery responses
to SOS including emails and meetings
with [redact] re: same and draft edits 3
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Email from process server re: service on
Cangelosi 0.1
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Tel call with process server re: serving
Cangelosi 0.1
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Cangelosi and T. Jones
enclosing depo notices and schedule 0.1
10/24/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Cangelosi and T. Jones re:
schedule 0.1
10/25/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re; depo schedule 0.1
10/25/2011 Zeitler Email to and from [redact] 0.3
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] enclosing draft
outline and review of same and email to
[redact] re: same 0.7
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] enclosing outline and
emails re: same 0.4
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Review and edit outline [redact] and
send edits to [redact] 1.2
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Review of intro outline and email [redact]
re: same 0.5
10/25/2011 Zeitler Receipt and review of trial set by court 0.1
10/25/2011 Zeitler Emails to [redact] re: depos 0.3
10/25/2011 Zeitler Email to A. Colby re: depos 0.1
10/25/2011 Zeitler Prepare for depositions 4.5
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Review of all documents and create
outlines for depositions 4
10/25/2011 Zeitler Email from and to A Colby re: depos 0.2
10/25/2011 Zeitler Emails to and from [redact] re: DHH docs 0.2
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Call from T. Jones and return call and
convo re: discovery 0.3
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Email to and from C. Cangelosi re: E.
Cangelosi address for service 0.2
10/25/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of response to RFA
from SOS and email to [redact] re: same 0.5
10/26/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of emails from
[redact] re: outlines and edits 0.7
10/26/2011 Zeitler
legal research in preparation for
deposiitons 0.3
10/26/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: documents for
depositions and response thereto 0.2
10/26/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] re: depositions and
response thereto 0.2
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 25 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
10/26/2011 Zeitler
Emails and meetings with [redact] re:
deposition prep 0.5
10/26/2011 Zeitler Prepare for depositions 3
10/26/2011 Zeitler
Email from process server re: service on
Cangelosi and response thereto 0.2
10/26/2011 Zeitler
Tc from Elsie Cangelosi and emails
[redact] re: same 0.4
10/27/2011 Zeitler
Emails from [redact] re: MSJ outline and
tel call re: same 0.5
10/27/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Alexander re: supplemental
docs 0.1
10/27/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] re: organizing
policies for DCFS VR in preparation for
depos 0.7
10/27/2011
Review of documents BATES numbered
for purposes of determining which
documents will be used in depos 2.5
10/27/2011 Zeitler
tc to C. Cangelosi re: depositions and
email to [redact] re: same 0.2
10/27/2011 Zeitler Tel conf with C. Cangelosi re: depos 0.1
10/27/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: SOS
depos 0.3
10/28/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] enclosing PSJ outline
and review of same and edit same 0.5
10/28/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] enclosing index of
BATES numbered docs for purposes of use
in Depos and review of same for purpose
of preparing for depos 0.4
10/28/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: deposition notices 0.1
10/28/2011 Zeitler
Call from and to process server re:
cangelosi 0.2
10/29/2011 Zeitler Email from [redact] re: DCFS depos 0.1
10/30/2011 Zeitler
prepare for depos including review and
revision of outlines for caseworker depos 3
10/30/2011 Zeitler
review of outlines and additional
documents in preparation for depositions 2
10/31/2011 Zeitler Meetings with [redact] re dcfs depos 0.5
10/31/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: outlines
for DHH depos 0.2
10/31/2011 Zeitler
Review of responses from DHH to
discovery 0.5
10/31/2011 Zeitler
email from process server re: serviece for
SOS depos and response thereto 0.2
11/1/2011 Zeitler
Emails from and to [redact] re: depo
outlines 0.2
11/1/2011 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] in preparation for
depositions 0.6
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 26 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
11/2/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of motion for partial SJ
and meetings re: same 1.5
11/2/2011 Zeitler
Work on documents for depositions and
send email to [redact] re: same 0.6
11/3/2011 Zeitler Numerous Emails with [redact] re: depos 0.7
11/3/2011 Zeitler Tel conference with [redact] re: strategy 0.7
11/3/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from C. Alexander re: depos
and emails to [redact] re: same 0.4
11/3/2011 Zeitler Emails to [redact] re: tech depos 0.2
11/3/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: discovery from SOS 0.1
11/4/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: strategy and
email to [redact] re: same 0.5
11/4/2011 Zeitler Tel call with C. Alexander re: depos 0.3
11/6/2011 Zeitler
Prepare for depos including total review
and organiztion of documents and outlines 5
11/7/2011 Zeitler Travel for DCFS Depos 5
11/7/2011 Zeitler Strategy meetings for dpos 3
11/8/2011 Zeitler Take DCFS Depos 6
11/9/2011 Zeitler Take DCFS Depos 6
11/10/2011 Zeitler DCFS depos 5
11/10/2011 Zeitler Travel 4
11/11/2011 Zeitler Call with [redact] re: DHH Depos 0.4
11/14/2011 Zeitler Travel to LA for DHH Depos 4
11/15/2011 Zeitler prepare for and take DHH tech depo 6
11/16/2011 Zeitler prepare for and attend depos 6
11/17/2011 Zeitler Prepare for and take DHH tech depo 3
11/17/2011 Zeitler Attend DHH depos 3
11/17/2011 Zeitler TRAVEL HOME FROM DHH DEPOS 4
11/18/2011 Zeitler Meeting with [redact] re: strategy 0.5
11/28/2011 Zeitler Emails to [redact] 0.2
11/28/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: motions and
strategy 0.6
11/28/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of Motion for Partial SJ
- SOS 0.5
11/28/2011 Zeitler
review research on issues related to
responding to motios from state. 0.5
11/28/2011 Zeitler
Reeipt and review of Motion for Partial SJ
from DCFS 0.5
11/29/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of order from court re:
set for oral argument re: PSJ 0.2
11/29/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing draft of PSJ response and
review of enclosure 0.2
11/29/2011 Zeitler
Email from C. Cangelosi and emails to
[redact] re: same 0.3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 27 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
11/30/2011 Zeitler
Emails with co-counsel re: new oral
argument date and need to extend 0.3
11/30/2011 Zeitler
Receipt and review of [redact] depos
from DCFS in preparation for creating MSJ 0.5
12/1/2011 Zeitler
Schedule/plan and strategize for MSJ and
email [redact] re: same 0.7
12/1/2011 Zeitler
Tel conf with E. Cangelosi re: date of
deposition 0.1
12/1/2011 Zeitler
Email to [redact] Re; serving E.
Cangelosi 0.1
12/2/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: response to M.
Partial SJ 0.5
12/2/2011 Zeitler
Emails with [redact] re: deposition
[redact] 0.3
12/2/2011 Zeitler
[redact] send emails re: deposition
summaries [redact] 0.8
12/2/2011 Zeitler
Review of deposition transcripts and
create strategy for summaries in
preparation for drafting MSJ 0.8
12/3/2011 Zeitler Review docs for SOS depos 3.5
12/4/2011 Zeitler Emails with [redact] re: PSJ response 0.3
12/4/2011 Zeitler
Edit motion for partial summary judgment
response 1.5
12/5/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re:
communications with o/c and date of oral
argument 0.2
12/5/2011 Zeitler Receipt and review of client email 0.1
12/5/2011 Zeitler
Call and email to A. Colby re: moving date
of oral argument 0.2
12/5/2011 Zeitler
Call and email to C. Cangelosi re: moving
date of oral argument and response
thereto and draft response 0.4
12/6/2011 Zeitler [redact] [co-counsel conference call] 1
12/6/2011 Zeitler Call with [redact] 0.2
12/6/2011 Zeitler [redact] [deposition summaries] 0.5
12/6/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: deadlines for case
and response 0.2
12/6/2011 Zeitler Call to C. Cangelosi 0.1
12/6/2011 Zeitler
Call with C. Cangelosi and T. Jones re:
depos 0.3
12/6/2011 Zeitler
meeting with [redact] re: William
Crawford 0.2
12/6/2011 Zeitler Draft outlines for SOS depos. 5
12/7/2011 Zeitler
Email from Ebony Townsend enclosing
interrogatories 0.3
12/7/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from Co-counsel re outlines
for depos 0.5
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 28 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
12/7/2011 Zeitler Calls with [redact] re: SOS depos 0.2
12/7/2011 Zeitler
Emails from T. Jones re: depositions and
W. Crawford and emails/call with co-
counsel re: same 1
12/7/2011 Zeitler Emails with [redact] re: depos 0.4
12/8/2011 Zeitler
Emails and calls with [redact] re: motion
to extend time for PSJ 0.5
12/9/2011 Zeitler Edit Motion response to PSJ 4
12/9/2011 Zeitler
Review of document in preparation for
Joanne reed depo 3
12/10/2011 Zeitler Continue drafting response to PSJ 4
12/10/2011 Zeitler
review of documents for purposes of
drafting outline for deposition for Joanne
reed. 1.5
12/12/2011 Zeitler
work on outlines and go through all
exhibits for SOS depos 6
12/13/2011 Zeitler Email to [redact] re: depos 0.1
12/13/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Cangelosi and T. Jones re:
depos of Durand and Reed 0.1
12/13/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: strategy for
depositions and documents needed from
SOS 0.4
12/13/2011 Zeitler Prepare for depositions 3.5
12/13/2011 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: depos
and documents 0.4
12/13/2011 Zeitler email to T. Jones re: meeting 0.1
12/13/2011 Zeitler
Emails with [redact] and C. Cangelosi
re:depo schedules. 0.3
12/13/2011 Zeitler
Email to C. Cangelosi re: timing of Rogers
depo 0.1
12/14/2011 Zeitler
Call to and from T. Jones re: stipulation
and documents 0.2
12/14/2011 Zeitler
Emails back and forth with [redact] re:
stipulation 0.4
12/14/2011 Zeitler Meeting with [redact] re: tech depo 0.2
12/14/2011 Zeitler
Emails with C. Cangelosi re: deposition
logistics 0.3
12/14/2011 Zeitler Draft outline for Joanne Reed Depo 2.5
12/15/2011 Zeitler prepare for depositions 6
12/15/2011 Zeitler
Numerous emails and phone call meeting
with [redact] RE: deposition strategy 0.5
12/15/2011 Zeitler
calls to C. Cangelosi and T. Jones re:
depositions and production 0.2
12/15/2011 Zeitler
Meeting with [redact] re: subpoenas for
E. Cangelosi deposition and emails with
[redact] re: same 0.4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 29 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
12/15/2011 Zeitler
Meeting and email [redact] re:
information/data produced by SOS in
preparation for depositions 0.4
12/16/2011 Zeitler
Email from T. Jones re: documents for
production and emails from and to
[redact] re: same and draft response to
T. Jones re: same 0.4
12/16/2011 Zeitler
Prepare for deposition of Joanne Reed and
Diana Durand 4
12/16/2011 Zeitler
Email to T. Jones and C. Cangelosi re:
depos 0.1
12/16/2011 Zeitler meetings and emails re: depos for SOS 1.5
12/18/2011 Zeitler Travel to LA for depositions of SOS - 5
12/18/2011 Zeitler Preparation for LA SOS depositions 2
12/19/2011 Zeitler Depose Diana Durand 4.5
12/19/2011 Zeitler Depose Joanne Reed 4
12/19/2011 Zeitler
Strategy discussions with Co-counsel re:
Depositions of SOS 1
12/20/2011 Zeitler Attend deposition of Cate McRitchie 4
12/20/2011 Zeitler Attend Deposition of William Crawford 1
12/20/2011 Zeitler
Travel to Washington DC from SOS
Depositions 4
12/21/2011 Zeitler Emails to [redact] re: PSJ 0.4
12/21/2011 Zeitler
Email to E. Townsend re: discovery
request and receipt of response thereto 0.2
12/22/2011 Zeitler
Review of surveys for purposes of
responding to DCFS discovery 2.5
12/22/2011 Zeitler Call with [redact] re: discovery 0.2
12/26/2011 Zeitler
Email from [redact] re: PSJ brief and
response thereto 0.2
12/27/2011 Zeitler Emails to [redact] re: PSJ 0.4
12/29/2011 Zeitler
Review surveys in order to draft
responses to DCFS and DHH [redact] 2
1/2/2012 Zeitler
Draft discovery responses to DHH and
DCFS 8
1/3/2012 Zeitler
Emails to and from [redact] re: discovery
responses 0.3
1/3/2012 Zeitler
Emails from and to [redact] re: response
to Motion for Partial SJ 0.2
1/3/2012 Zeitler
Receipt and review deposition of Donna
Durand for purposes of drafting MSJ 0.5
1/3/2012 Zeitler
Work on Discovery responses for DHH and
DCFS 3.5
1/3/2012 Zeitler
Receipt and review of email from [redact]
enclosing draft RFA response to DCFS and
review of same and edit and send back
response 0.4
1/4/2012 Zeitler Emails re: discovery submissions 0.3
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 30 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
1/4/2012 Zeitler
Emails and meetings with [redact] re:
PSJ and review deposition transcripts re:
same 2.3
1/5/2012 Zeitler Emails and meetings [redact] 0.5
1/5/2012 Zeitler
Telephone Call to Elsie Cangelosi and
emails re: same 0.3
1/6/2012 Zeitler Review PSJ brief and edit same 2
1/6/2012 Zeitler Work on DCFS RFA 0.5
1/6/2012 Zeitler Work on DCFS rogs 1
1/7/2012 Zeitler emails to and from [redact] re: PSJ brief 0.3
1/8/2012 Zeitler
Emails and meetings with [redact] and
[redact] re: PSJ brief 0.5
1/9/2012 Zeitler
Meetings with [redact] and emails and
review of depositions for purpose of
editing PSJ brief 3
1/11/2012 Zeitler
Prepare for and participate in scheduling
conference with the court and meeting
with co-counsel re: same 0.9
1/11/2012 Zeitler Emails re: priv log for DHH 0.3
1/12/2012 Zeitler
emails re: new dates and deadlines
[redact] 0.4
1/13/2012 Zeitler Emails and meetings re: [redact] 0.5
1/17/2012 Zeitler Emails re: client 0.2
1/17/2012 Zeitler Call to E. Cangelosi and emails re: same 0.3
1/17/2012 Zeitler
Email from C. Cangelosi re: depos and
emails and meetings with Co-counsel re:
same 0.5
1/18/2012 Zeitler Emails re: depo requests from SOS 0.4
1/24/2012 Zeitler Emails to [redact] re: depos 0.3
1/25/2012 Zeitler
Review of deposition transcripts for
purposes of MSJ 3.5
1/29/2012 Zeitler
Review surveys in order to draft
responses to DCFS and DHH Surveys 2
TOTAL 638.8
45.5 of which is travel time
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 31 of 32
Nicole Kovite Zeitler Time Sheet
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-18 Filed 02/26/13 Page 32 of 32
Exhibit C - Niyati Shah Time Records
Date Last name Task Note Hours
3-Jan-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.5
3-Jan-11 Shah
edit witnessdeclaration 0.5
3-Jan-11 Shah edit notice ltr 0.5
10-Feb-11 Shah
edit/reviewquestionaire 0.4
25-Feb-11 Shah review ltr 0.4
21-Mar-11 Shah
review/editcomplaint 0.8
22-Mar-11 Shah
discuss SOSliability 0.3
29-Mar-11 Shah
review LAcomplaint 0.66
5-Apr-11 Shah
call rediscoverytimeline 1
5-Apr-11 Shah
researchchief electionofficial 0.4
7-Apr-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.75
7-Apr-11 Shah
reviewinterogatories 0.75
11-Apr-11 Shah
complaintreview 0.3
11-Apr-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.5
12-Apr-11 Shah
discussdiscoverscope 0.4
12-Apr-11 Shah
research PIlaw 0.66
12-Apr-11 Shah
review andeditdiscoverybrief 0.8
13-Apr-11 Shah
review andeditdiscoverybrief 0.8
14-Apr-11 Shah
email rediscoverydemand/scope 0.5
15-Apr-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.9
15-Apr-11 Shah review Rogs 0.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 40
17-Apr-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.75
19-Apr-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.75
21-Apr-11 Shah
reviewexpediteddiscoverybrief 0.75
26-Apr-11 Shah
co counselconf call 1
27-Apr-11 Shah
review ltr toopp counsel 0.4
27-Apr-11 Shah review RFA 0.6
28-Apr-11 Shah review RFP 0.6
4-May-11 Shah
review30(b)(6) 0.66
5-May-11 Shah
reviewinterogatories 0.7
10-May-11 Shah
review ltr todefendants 0.5
12-May-11 Shah
review SOSdiscoverydocs 0.2
13-May-11 Shah
reviewdiscoverydocs 0.66
23-May-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.33
23-May-11 Shah
discoverydocs 0.66
27-May-11 Shah
discussresponse toState 0.3
31-May-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.5
31-May-11 Shah
discuss 26(f)submission 0.5
1-Jun-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.75
1-Jun-11 Shah review ltr 0.1
3-Jun-11 Shah
discoverydocs 0.5
6-Jun-11 Shah
co counselconf call 1.75
6-Jun-11 Shah review ltr 0.5
16-Jun-11 Shah MTD drafting 1.9
17-Jun-11 Shah MTD Drafting 1.4
21-Jun-11 Shah reply brief 2.2
22-Jun-11 Shah reply brief 0.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 40
23-Jun-11 Shah reply brief 4.1
24-Jun-11 Shah reply brief 2.3
27-Jun-11 Shah
reviewsettlemntagreement 0.8
27-Jun-11 Shah
discusscontinance 0.3
28-Jun-11 Shah
reviewsettlementagreement 0.8
29-Jun-11 Shah
review ltr tocounsel 0.4
30-Jun-11 Shah reply brief 1.1
1-Jul-11 Shah
reviewagreement 1.4
1-Jul-11 Shah
review ltr toopp counsel 0.1
5-Jul-11 Shah
co counselconf call 1.75
5-Jul-11 Shah
co counselconf call 1.75
6-Jul-11 Shah
settlementconferencecall 1.25
6-Jul-11 Shah
co counselconf call 1
6-Jul-11 Shah
settlementconferencecall 1.25
6-Jul-11 Shah
motion forextensin 0.8
6-Jul-11 Shah
motion forextension 0.4
8-Jul-11 Shah
reviewsettlementagreement 0.3
14-Jul-11 Shah
review/draftinitialdisclosures 0.9
19-Jul-11 Shah
review/editchanges tosettlementagreement 1
26-Jul-11 Shah review rogs 0.75
5-Aug-11 Shah
co counselsettlementprep 1.75
8-Aug-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 40
8-Aug-11 Shah
settlmentconf call 1.5
17-Aug-11 Shah
reviewdiscovery 4
18-Aug-11 Shah
reviewdiscovery 4
19-Aug-11 Shah
reviewdiscovery 4
22-Aug-11 Shah
reviewdiscovery 4
30-Aug-11 Shah
co counselconf call 0.75
7-Sep-11 Shah
reviewdiscoverydocs 0.1
8-Sep-11 Shah
reviewdiscvoerydocs 0.2
14-Sep-11 Shah
discovery/depo docs 1.3
15-Sep-11 Shah
discovery/depo docs 0.3
22-Sep-11 Shah
deporesearch 0.2
26-Sep-11 Shah
reviewdiscoverydocs 0.4
26-Sep-11 Shah
review/discuss ltr rediscovery 0.4
27-Sep-11 Shah
reviewdiscoverydocs 0.6
28-Sep-11 Shah
reviewdiscoverydocs 1
18-Oct-11 Shah
draft depooutline 1.3
19-Oct-11 Shah
draft depooutline 1.4
19-Oct-11 Shah
discoverydraft review 0.5
20-Oct-11 Shah
subpoenareview 0.75
20-Oct-11 Shah review 0.2
27-Oct-11 Shah
email rerepresentation 0.2
31-Oct-11 Shah depo outline 2.4
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 40
1-Nov-11 Shah Depo Prep 1.8
2-Nov-11 Shah Depo Prep 0.75
2-Nov-11 Shah Review PSJ 0.8
3-Nov-11 Shah Depo Prep 0.4
6-Nov-11 Shah Depo Prep 7
7-Nov-11 Shah travel 5
7-Nov-11 Shah Depo Prep 3.2
8-Nov-11 Shah
Depos andDepo Prep 9
9-Nov-11 Shah
Depos andDepo Prep 9
10-Nov-11 Shah Depos 5
10-Nov-11 Shah travel 4
17-Nov-11 Shah PSJ 0.5
23-Nov-11 Shah Review PSJ 0.8
28-Nov-11 Shah Review PSJ 0.8
29-Nov-11 Shah Order 0.3
5-Dec-11 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
5-Dec-11 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
6-Dec-11 ShahReceivestatus update 0.20
6-Dec-11 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
6-Dec-11 Shah
Preparewitness fordeposition 0.50
7-Dec-11 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
7-Dec-11 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
7-Dec-11 Shah
Preparewitness fordeposition 0.80
7-Dec-11 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 40
9-Dec-11 ShahResearchand prepare 0.40
9-Dec-11 Shah
Preparewitness fordeposition 0.20
10-Dec-11 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.70
12-Dec-11 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
12-Dec-11 Shah
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery 0.50
13-Dec-11 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
13-Dec-11 Shah
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery 0.30
14-Dec-11 ShahReview andanalyze Court Order 0.30
14-Dec-11 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
14-Dec-11 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.30
14-Dec-11 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.60
15-Dec-11 ShahReview andanalyze 0.60
16-Dec-11 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses
EmployeeRecords 5.00
16-Dec-11 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.30
21-Dec-11 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
9-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 40
11-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
11-Jan-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencecall w/ Court 0.50
12-Jan-12 ShahReview andanalyze
motion tocompel 0.30
12-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
12-Jan-12 ShahReview andanalyze
CourtReschedulingOrder 0.20
13-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
16-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
17-Jan-12 ShahReview andanalyze
motion tocompel, 3rdrfps 0.80
17-Jan-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 3.50
18-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails
production ofdiscovery 0.50
18-Jan-12 ShahReview andanalyze
follow up rediscovery 0.30
19-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
20-Jan-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.80
20-Jan-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.10
23-Jan-12 Shahoralargument PSJ 0.20
23-Jan-12 Shah
Draftdiscoveryresponses 0.40
23-Jan-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 2.30
24-Jan-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 40
24-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
24-Jan-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.66
24-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
25-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
25-Jan-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
Outstandingdiscovery 0.30
25-Jan-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.60
25-Jan-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.30
25-Jan-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 3.00
25-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
26-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
26-Jan-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.60
27-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
27-Jan-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.66
27-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
27-Jan-12 Shah
Preparewitness fordeposition 0.50
29-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
29-Jan-12 ShahAttenddepositions Travel 4.50
30-Jan-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 40
30-Jan-12 ShahAttenddepositions 7.00
31-Jan-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 1.40
31-Jan-12 ShahAttenddepositions 4.00
31-Jan-12 ShahAttenddepositions travel 4.50
1-Feb-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.50
1-Feb-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.50
1-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.30
2-Feb-12 Shah Draft motion 1.60
2-Feb-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.20
2-Feb-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.40
2-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
2-Feb-12 Shah Draft motion 1.00
2-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
2-Feb-12 Shah Draft motion 1.20
2-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
3-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
3-Feb-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.30
3-Feb-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.40
3-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
4-Feb-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.40
6-Feb-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 40
7-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery 0.40
7-Feb-12 Shah Research 0.50
7-Feb-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
7-Feb-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.80
7-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
8-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery 0.40
8-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
9-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
10-Feb-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 1.20
10-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
13-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoverysummaries 0.40
13-Feb-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.50
14-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.30
15-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
16-Feb-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 40
16-Feb-12 Shah
Participate inpreparationfor oralargument 1.50
16-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery 0.40
20-Feb-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.30
21-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.75
21-Feb-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.80
22-Feb-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.40
22-Feb-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 1.40
22-Feb-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.60
22-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
23-Feb-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 1.10
23-Feb-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.66
23-Feb-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
23-Feb-12 Shah Research 1.33
24-Feb-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.30
24-Feb-12 Shah
Prepare forcourtconference 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 40
24-Feb-12 ShahAttend courtconference 1.00
24-Feb-12 Shah Research 2.40
27-Feb-12 Shah Draft motion 4.10
27-Feb-12 Shah Research 2.20
28-Feb-12 Shah Draft motion 3.10
28-Feb-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.80
29-Feb-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 2.30
1-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.50
1-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 3.10
2-Mar-12 Shah
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery 0.75
2-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 2.20
5-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 1.30
6-Mar-12 Shah
Review andrevise draftmotion forsummaryjudgment 2.60
6-Mar-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
7-Mar-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.75
7-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.60
7-Mar-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.66
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 40
8-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 2.30
8-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.66
9-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 1.20
9-Mar-12 Shah Draft motion 2.20
9-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.50
10-Mar-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
12-Mar-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
12-Mar-12 Shah
Draftdiscoveryresponses 0.66
12-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.60
13-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.66
14-Mar-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
16-Mar-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoverysummaries 0.66
16-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.40
16-Mar-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 13 of 40
20-Mar-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.50
21-Mar-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.20
21-Mar-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoverysummaries 0.50
26-Mar-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.30
26-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.80
27-Mar-12 Shah Research 2.66
27-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.66
28-Mar-12 Shah Draft memo 2.20
28-Mar-12 Shah Research 2.75
28-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.75
29-Mar-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.50
29-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.90
29-Mar-12 Shah Draft memo 2.30
29-Mar-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
29-Mar-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoverysummaries 0.40
30-Mar-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.66
30-Mar-12 ShahReview andrevise draft SJM 0.70
30-Mar-12 ShahReview andanalyze
ScottRelease 0.40
30-Mar-12 ShahReview andrevise draft MTS 0.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 14 of 40
30-Mar-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
30-Mar-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
Newdiscovery 0.66
2-Apr-12 ShahReview andrevise draft Surreply 0.75
2-Apr-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits declaration 0.40
2-Apr-12 Shah Draft memo MTS Reply 0.70
2-Apr-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.60
2-Apr-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
Opp to Add'ldiscovery 0.66
3-Apr-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
Opp to Add'lDiscovery 0.66
3-Apr-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
Motion toStrike 0.60
4-Apr-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.66
6-Apr-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.66
6-Apr-12 ShahReview andrevise draft ltr re rogs 0.40
9-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
9-Apr-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.50
10-Apr-12 Shah
Participate inpreparationfor oralargument 2.00
10-Apr-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoverysummaries 0.40
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 15 of 40
11-Apr-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.50
13-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
13-Apr-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoverysummaries 0.30
13-Apr-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.40
15-Apr-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.60
15-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
16-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
16-Apr-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.75
16-Apr-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.40
17-Apr-12 Shah
Participate inpreparationfor oralargument 2.00
17-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
17-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
17-Apr-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
18-Apr-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.20
18-Apr-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.60
19-Apr-12 Shah travel time 4.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 16 of 40
20-Apr-12 ShahAttend oralargument 2.60
20-Apr-12 Shah travel time 4.50
20-Apr-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.40
23-Apr-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.75
23-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
23-Apr-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.40
24-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
25-Apr-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
25-Apr-12 Shah
Review draftsettlementagreement 0.75
26-Apr-12 Shah
Review draftsettlementagreement 0.50
27-Apr-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.70
27-Apr-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.40
27-Apr-12 Shah
Review draftsettlementagreement 0.30
30-Apr-12 Shah
Prepare forcourtconference 0.66
30-Apr-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.30
1-May-12 Shah
Review draftsettlementagreement 0.75
1-May-12 Shah
Review draftsettlementagreement 0.66
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 17 of 40
2-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
2-May-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.20
3-May-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.40
3-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencecall
meet andconfer 0.50
3-May-12 Shah Draftmeet andconfer 1.20
3-May-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.75
3-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
3-May-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.75
4-May-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.40
4-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 1.30
4-May-12 ShahReview andanalyze
deponotices/subpoenas 0.20
7-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.66
8-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.30
8-May-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.20
8-May-12 Shah Research 0.50
8-May-12 Shah travel time 4.00
8-May-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
9-May-12 ShahTalk withPlaintiffs 0.75
9-May-12 ShahAttend courtconference 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 18 of 40
9-May-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
10-May-12 ShahAttenddepositions 4.00
10-May-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.50
11-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.66
11-May-12 Shah travel time 5.00
14-May-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.80
14-May-12 ShahAttorneywork product 0.20
15-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.80
15-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.60
15-May-12 ShahAttendmeeting
w/ SB andMR 0.15
16-May-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.75
17-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.30
18-May-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.20
18-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.40
18-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.10
18-May-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.40
21-May-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.50
22-May-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.75
22-May-12 ShahReview andanalyze discovery 0.40
22-May-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 0.80
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 19 of 40
23-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.30
23-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.25
23-May-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.20
23-May-12 Shah
Prepare forcourtconference 0.40
23-May-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
24-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.20
24-May-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.30
24-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.25
24-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencecall w/ Court 0.25
24-May-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.66
24-May-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.30
24-May-12 Shah
Review andrevise draftdiscoveryresponses 0.40
25-May-12 Shah Draft 0.75
29-May-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
29-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 3.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 20 of 40
30-May-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 1.40
31-May-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.40
31-May-12 Shah Draft witness lists 0.40
1-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze
research rereconsideration 0.60
1-Jun-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
1-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
1-Jun-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.66
3-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft SJ 0.50
3-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft witness list 0.50
3-Jun-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.40
3-Jun-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
4-Jun-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.30
4-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.20
4-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
4-Jun-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 1.30
4-Jun-12 Shah Draft letter 0.66
5-Jun-12 Shah travel time 4.00
5-Jun-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 4.00
5-Jun-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 21 of 40
6-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.20
7-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft witness list 2.30
7-Jun-12 ShahAttenddepositions 3.00
7-Jun-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
7-Jun-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
8-Jun-12 Shah travel time 4.00
8-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.66
8-Jun-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
9-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.40
10-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.75
10-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.20
10-Jun-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
11-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.75
11-Jun-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
12-Jun-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
12-Jun-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
13-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 22 of 40
13-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.20
15-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.66
15-Jun-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.66
15-Jun-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.60
16-Jun-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
18-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.88
18-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.25
19-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft letter 0.50
19-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
20-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
20-Jun-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.75
21-Jun-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 2.30
21-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.30
22-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.40
22-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencecall
CourtConference 0.25
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 23 of 40
22-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
22-Jun-12 Shah
Review andrevise draftmotion forsummaryjudgment 1.75
22-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze RFP 0.66
23-Jun-12 Shah
Review andrevise draftmotion forsummaryjudgment 0.60
25-Jun-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.30
25-Jun-12 ShahReview andanalyze
DepoObjections 0.50
26-Jun-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.90
26-Jun-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 1.20
26-Jun-12 ShahResearchand prepare
depositionreview 2.30
27-Jun-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 2.20
27-Jun-12 Shah Draft letter 0.75
27-Jun-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.20
28-Jun-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 2.50
28-Jun-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
ltr re depoobjections 0.50
29-Jun-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 2.33
29-Jun-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.40
30-Jun-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.40
30-Jun-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 2.33
1-Jul-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 0.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 24 of 40
1-Jul-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.40
2-Jul-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 2.30
2-Jul-12 ShahDraft motionfor sum jud 0.30
2-Jul-12 ShahResearchand prepare 1.20
2-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
2-Jul-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 1.00
3-Jul-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 1.60
3-Jul-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.80
3-Jul-12 ShahResearchand prepare 0.50
4-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
4-Jul-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
5-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze Orders 0.75
5-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
6-Jul-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.40
6-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze 0.50
6-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.75
7-Jul-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoverysummaries 0.50
7-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.80
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 25 of 40
7-Jul-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.66
8-Jul-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 1.80
9-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
9-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 2.25
9-Jul-12 Shah Research 1.20
10-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.20
10-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 2.75
11-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.40
11-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.40
11-Jul-12 Shah travel time 4.00
12-Jul-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
12-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 2.10
12-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
12-Jul-12 Shah
Preparewitness fordeposition 4.50
12-Jul-12 ShahDefenddepositions 1.20
12-Jul-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 1.10
13-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 2.50
13-Jul-12 Shah travel time 4.00
13-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 26 of 40
13-Jul-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.30
13-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze
3rd rfpresponse 1.00
16-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
16-Jul-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.80
16-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.75
17-Jul-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.50
17-Jul-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
17-Jul-12 Shah Research 1.30
17-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.40
17-Jul-12 Shah Draft 0.20
18-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
18-Jul-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
18-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
18-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.40
19-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails Court email 0.60
19-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 27 of 40
20-Jul-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
20-Jul-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencecall w/ court 0.75
20-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.30
20-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.10
21-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 1.60
23-Jul-12 Shah Draft memo 0.75
23-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.40
23-Jul-12 Shah
Draftdiscoveryresponses 8.50
23-Jul-12 Shah Research 1.20
23-Jul-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.30
23-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.75
24-Jul-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 1.75
24-Jul-12 Shah Draft motion 7.50
25-Jul-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
25-Jul-12 ShahResearchand prepare RFPs 0.40
25-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze SOS ltr 0.20
26-Jul-12 Shah
Preparewitness fordeposition 0.50
26-Jul-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.60
26-Jul-12 Shah
Review andrevise draftdiscoveryresponses 1.75
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 28 of 40
27-Jul-12 ShahPrepare fordepositions 0.60
27-Jul-12 ShahReview andanalyze SOS email 0.10
27-Jul-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits 0.40
31-Jul-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
1-Aug-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.30
1-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
2-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
3-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.90
3-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
3-Aug-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 1.30
6-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
8-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
8-Aug-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial 0.75
9-Aug-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 0.40
9-Aug-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 0.40
10-Aug-12 Shah
Prepare fortelephoneconferencecall
pre trialconference 0.20
13-Aug-12 ShahAttorneywork product Trial prep 1.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 29 of 40
14-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.50
14-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails Pre trial conf 0.20
15-Aug-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
15-Aug-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
16-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
16-Aug-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
16-Aug-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.20
16-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails pre trial conf 0.20
16-Aug-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
17-Aug-12 ShahDraft replymotion 0.75
17-Aug-12 Shah Draft motion 0.75
18-Aug-12 ShahDraft replymotion 0.60
19-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
19-Aug-12 ShahReview andrevise draft SJM 5.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 30 of 40
20-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.50
20-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
20-Aug-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 3.50
21-Aug-12 Shah Draft PTO 1.75
21-Aug-12 ShahDraft replymotion 2.30
21-Aug-12 Shah
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 2.10
21-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.90
21-Aug-12 ShahReview andanalyze sos ltr to ct 0.20
22-Aug-12 ShahReview andrevise draft MTS 1.75
22-Aug-12 ShahReview andanalyze order 0.20
22-Aug-12 Shah
Draftdiscoverysummaries 1.20
22-Aug-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.40
23-Aug-12 Shah Draft memo MSJ 1.20
23-Aug-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.30
24-Aug-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.66
25-Aug-12 ShahReview andrevise draft MSJ 4.00
27-Aug-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails PTO 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 31 of 40
27-Aug-12 ShahReview andrevise draft MSJ 0.75
28-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
28-Aug-12 ShahResearchand prepare PTO 1.00
28-Aug-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits Scott Dec 0.40
28-Aug-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
28-Aug-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits SJM 3.00
13-Sep-12 ShahAttorneywork product
trial prep -order of proof 4.30
14-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 3.20
14-Sep-12 ShahReview andanalyze Settlement 0.50
14-Sep-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
15-Sep-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits for pto 3.00
15-Sep-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
16-Sep-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits PTO 1.30
17-Sep-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
17-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 7.40
17-Sep-12 ShahReview andanalyze PTO 1.10
18-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft M&C ltr 0.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 32 of 40
18-Sep-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.75
18-Sep-12 ShahResearchand prepare MILs 0.30
18-Sep-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants PTO Exhibits 2.50
18-Sep-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.50
18-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
Opp to StatConf 0.40
19-Sep-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
19-Sep-12 ShahReview andanalyze
PTOObjections 3.30
19-Sep-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.20
20-Sep-12 ShahAttendmeeting M&C re PTO 6.00
20-Sep-12 ShahReview andanalyze
Refusal tosign 0.20
21-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft 0.50
21-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
ConsolidatedPTO 3.50
21-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 2.10
22-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 2.40
23-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 2.10
23-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 0.80
23-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 0.75
24-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 1.60
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 33 of 40
24-Sep-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
PTOresponse 2.30
24-Sep-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
25-Sep-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 2.00
25-Sep-12 ShahReview andanalyze
M toContinue 0.40
25-Sep-12 Shah Draft motion
ProposedFindings ofFact &Conclusionsof Law 0.66
26-Sep-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
ProposedInjunction 0.75
26-Sep-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.50
26-Sep-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants
DHH &DCFS M toContinue 0.30
26-Sep-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 0.66
27-Sep-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.20
27-Sep-12 ShahAttend courtconference 1.40
27-Sep-12 Shah travel time 4.00
27-Sep-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits PFOF 2.10
28-Sep-12 Shah travel time 4.00
28-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PFOF 2.66
28-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft SOF 2.40
29-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PCOL 2.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 34 of 40
30-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PCOL 2.50
30-Sep-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 1.75
1-Oct-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails
meet andconfer 0.20
1-Oct-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencecall 0.50
1-Oct-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.80
2-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
ProposedInjunction 1.30
2-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 0.50
2-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 2.20
2-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft MILs 0.80
3-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PCOL 1.30
3-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 2.75
4-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 3.50
4-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft PTO 0.75
5-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft APTO 3.20
5-Oct-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
5-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
6-Oct-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 35 of 40
8-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft MILs 1.30
8-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product Trial prep 5.75
8-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
9-Oct-12 ShahReview andanalyze Order 0.20
9-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product Trial Prep 3.50
9-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.30
10-Oct-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits MILS 1.40
10-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
10-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants Witness lists 2.20
10-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 1.20
10-Oct-12 ShahReview andanalyze Stipulations 0.75
10-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
10-Oct-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
Omnibusmotion 1.66
10-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 36 of 40
11-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft MILs 0.75
11-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 2.00
11-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 1.40
11-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.50
11-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 2.75
11-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.90
11-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants 0.75
12-Oct-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.00
12-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 4.30
12-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft Stipulations 0.40
13-Oct-12 Shah travel time 4.00
13-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 3.60
14-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 8.00
15-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 5.00
15-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product Trial 8.00
16-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 4.80
16-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial 7.50
17-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial 3.75
17-Oct-12 ShahAttorneywork product trial prep 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 37 of 40
19-Oct-12 Shah travel time 4.00
22-Oct-12 Shah Research Re Standing 0.30
23-Oct-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails
re casecaption 0.10
23-Oct-12 ShahReview andanalyze
preliminarycourttranscripts 1.66
24-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
M to Admit Dfacts 0.50
25-Oct-12 Shah Researchvoterregistration 0.75
26-Oct-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails Errata Sheet 0.10
26-Oct-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails Case Caption 0.10
26-Oct-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails
M to Admit DFacts 0.30
31-Oct-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants
DHH DCFSObjections totheAdmissioninto EvidenceofStatementsContained inRec. Docs.138-1 and 0.40
31-Oct-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
Post TrialBrief 1.75
1-Nov-12 Shah Draft Sheets 2.10
1-Nov-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails VR precincts 0.10
1-Nov-12 ShahReview andrevise draft post trial brief 1.30
2-Nov-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
ErrataSheets 0.75
4-Nov-12 ShahReview andrevise draft Errata sheets 0.30
4-Nov-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails
Closing PP toDs 0.20
5-Nov-12 Shah DraftAnd senderrata sheets 0.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 38 of 40
8-Nov-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 1.25
8-Nov-12 Shah ResearchScott pollingplace 0.30
8-Nov-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails Case caption 0.20
9-Nov-12 Shah
Review andexchange e-mails
Closing PP toDs 0.40
9-Nov-12 ShahReview andrevise draft
Post trialbrief 0.40
12-Nov-12 ShahReview andanalyze
Post trialbrief 0.30
14-Nov-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
Post trialbrief 1.10
15-Nov-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.50
15-Nov-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
Post trialbrief 0.50
19-Nov-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants
Post trialbrief 0.75
19-Nov-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants
Post trialbrief 0.70
19-Nov-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants post trial brief 0.50
20-Nov-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants
Opp tochange casecaption 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 39 of 40
27-Nov-12 Shah
Review andanalyze filingbydefendant/defendants
Objection tonewevidence 0.66
27-Nov-12 Shah Researchjudicial noticepost trial 1.20
27-Nov-12 ShahAttorneywork product
opp to dmotionobjecting tonewevidence 0.20
28-Nov-12 Shah Researchpost trialevidence 1.20
28-Nov-12 Shah Draft memo
Opp to D min opp to posttrial evid 3.50
28-Nov-12 Shah
Participate intelephoneconferencewith litigationteam 0.66
29-Nov-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
P opp to Dobjection topost trial evid 0.75
30-Nov-12 Shah
Review andincorporateedits
Ps opp to Dsobjection topost trial evid 1.00
TOTAL 781.9
71 of which is travel time
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-19 Filed 02/26/13 Page 40 of 40
Exhibit D - Michelle Rupp Time Records
Date Last name Task Note Hours
18-Oct-11 Rupp Draft
depo outlineon formdistributionpolicy &practice 4.30
18-Oct-11 RuppReview andrevise draft
depooutlines 1.50
20-Oct-11 Rupp Draft
notices,subpoenas,andattachments 2.30
21-Oct-11 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 5.40
21-Oct-11 Rupp Draft depo notices 1.00
24-Oct-11 Ruppattorneywork product
read DCFSdiscovery,used it towriteexpectedanswers forJohnnieTyson depo 6.80
25-Oct-11 RuppReview andrevise draft
caseworkerdepo outline 4.50
10-Nov-11 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 1.80
17-Nov-11 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses
doc reviewfor remotetransactionsinfo 9.00
18-Nov-11 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses
doc reviewfor remotetransactionsinfo 1.00
21-Nov-11 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses
doc reviewfor remotetransactionsinfo 8.30
22-Nov-11 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses
doc reviewfor remotetransactionsinfo 8.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 32
23-Nov-11 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses
doc reviewfor remotetransactionsinfo 7.00
19-Dec-11 RuppAttendmeeting
discussion ofdepostrategies 1.00
1-Jan-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
proofreadingPSJ 2.25
1-Jan-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
reviewedmemo onDCFSpolicy,startedadding moredetail onDCFS policyto PSJ 2.00
3-Jan-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
reviewingDCFS docs& addingdetail onDCFS policyto PSJ 4.50
9-Jan-12 Ruppattorneywork product
citechecking /correctingPSJ sectionon DCFSpolicy 1.50
10-Jan-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
combiningconflictingversions 1.50
17-Jan-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
checkingpage cites inPSJ 2.00
9-Feb-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
re: SOSwithholdingof employeeevaluations;sentsummary ofconvo toNiyati &Dale 0.50
10-Feb-12 RuppAttend courtconference
re: SOSemployeeevaluations 1.30
13-Feb-12 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses doc review 5.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 32
21-Feb-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
motion tocompel DHHprivilege log 0.30
23-Feb-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
w/ Niyati &Ron 0.20
23-Feb-12 RuppAttendmeeting w/ Niyati 0.20
23-Feb-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
w/ Niyati andDale 2.00
23-Feb-12 RuppAttend courtconference
re: SOSmotion tostrike 2.00
24-Feb-12 RuppAttend courtconference
statusconference 0.30
28-Feb-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
28-Feb-12 Rupp Research
re: SOSMotion toStrike 6.00
29-Feb-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
29-Feb-12 Rupp Research
& drafting re:SOS motionto strike 8.00
1-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
5-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andrevise draftreply motion
motion tocompel(DHH) 0.30
5-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
6-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
7-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 3 of 32
8-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andrevise draftreply motion
PSJ(includessomeresearchtime) 5.00
8-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
9-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
9-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andrevise draftreply motion PSJ 1.00
16-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
20-Mar-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
w/ Niyati &Dale 1.00
21-Mar-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
w/ Niyati &Dale 0.50
21-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
22-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
23-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
26-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
27-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
28-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
29-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
30-Mar-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 4 of 32
2-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
3-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
4-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
6-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
9-Apr-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
w/ Niyati andDale 0.50
10-Apr-12 Rupp
Participateinpreparationfor oralargument
moot forDale 2.00
10-Apr-12 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 3.50
11-Apr-12 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 5.00
13-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
15-Apr-12 Rupp
Reviewdiscoveryresponses 0.10
16-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
16-Apr-12 RuppAttorneywork product
deposummariesfor Reed &Weatherford 4.00
17-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
17-Apr-12 Rupp
Participateinpreparationfor oralargument
moot forDale 2.00
18-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 5 of 32
23-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
23-Apr-12 RuppAttendmeeting
w/ Sarah &Niyati 0.25
23-Apr-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
24-Apr-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails SJ 0.10
27-Apr-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
27-Apr-12 RuppTalk withPlaintiffs Rev. Taylor 0.25
30-Apr-12 Rupp Research
Legalstandardsfor fullsummaryjudgmentmotion 2.00
30-Apr-12 RuppAttorneywork product
Review ofdraft letter &associatedemails to MJWilkinson 0.10
30-Apr-12 Rupp
Preparewitness fordeposition
Phone callw/ Rev.Taylor 0.50
1-May-12 Rupp
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery
Revieweddocumentsproduced byPlaintiffLouisianaStateConferenceof theNAACP inpreparationfor defenseof Rev.Taylor'sdeposition. 4.00
1-May-12 Rupp
Review draftsettlementagreement 0.10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 6 of 32
2-May-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencewith litigationteam
re:tomorrow'smeet andconfer w/defendant'sattorneys 1.10
2-May-12 Rupp
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery
Doc reviewof LA-NAACPdocs inpreparationfor defenseof Rev.Taylor'sdeposition 5.80
3-May-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
meet &confer forsettlementconference 0.40
3-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
3-May-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
letter toJudgeWilkinson 0.20
3-May-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencewith litigationteam
PV-onlydiscussionafter meet &confer 0.30
3-May-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencewith litigationteam
discussionwith LDFafter meet &confer 0.60
3-May-12 Rupp
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery
ReviewedLA-NAACPdocs inpreparationfor Rev.Taylordeposition 4.00
4-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
4-May-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
letter andchart toMagistrateJudge 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 7 of 32
4-May-12 Rupp
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery
ReviewingLA-NAACPdocs inpreparationfordefendingRev.Taylor's 1.60
7-May-12 Rupp
Reviewdocumentsproduced indiscovery
ReviewedLA-NAACPdocs inpreparationfor defenseof Rev.Taylor'sdeposition 0.90
8-May-12 Rupp Researchlegalstandards 4.20
8-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
9-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
9-May-12 RuppTalk withPlaintiffs Rev. Taylor 1.25
10-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
11-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
14-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
15-May-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.60
15-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
15-May-12 RuppAttendmeeting
w/ Sarah &Niyati 0.25
16-May-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
opp tocertificationbrief 1.10
17-May-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 8 of 32
18-May-12 RuppAttorneywork product
readingproposed SJoutline 0.10
18-May-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam call w/ LDF 1.10
21-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
22-May-12 RuppTalk withPlaintiffs
called Rev.Johnson toconfirmdepositiondate 0.10
22-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
22-May-12 RuppAttendmeeting
internaldiscussionre: discoveryandexhibit/witness lists 1.50
23-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
23-May-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.25
23-May-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.30
24-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
24-May-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
call with LDFafter statusconference 0.30
24-May-12 RuppAttendmeeting
internaldiscussion 0.50
24-May-12 RuppAttorneywork product
compilingwitness list 5.00
24-May-12 RuppAttend courtconference
Statusconferencewith allparties &Court re:motion forcertification 0.25
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 9 of 32
25-May-12 RuppAttendmeeting
w/ Sarah &Niyati re: SJoutline 1.00
25-May-12 RuppAttorneywork product
GoingthroughDCFSConfidentialdocumentsfor helpfulexhibits;enteringthem onspreadsheet.Preparationfor exhibitlist. 3.00
27-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
28-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
29-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
29-May-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.30
30-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
31-May-12 RuppAttendmeeting
re: SJ +witness &exhibit lists 0.50
31-May-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
1-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.70
1-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
w/ Ron &Natasha 1.00
1-Jun-12 RuppTalk withPlaintiffs
call w/ Dr.Johnson 1.00
2-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 10 of 32
3-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
4-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
4-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.60
5-Jun-12 RuppTalk withPlaintiffs 2.50
5-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
5-Jun-12 Rupp travel time
flight fromDC to NewOrleans 5.00
5-Jun-12 Rupp
Preparewitness fordeposition Dr. Johnson 0.75
5-Jun-12 RuppAttendmeeting w/ Natasha 0.75
6-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
6-Jun-12 RuppAttenddepositions 6.00
7-Jun-12 RuppAttorneywork product
& meetingw/ Niyati &Sarah re:witness &exhibit list 2.30
7-Jun-12 RuppAttorneywork product
working onexhibit lis 4.00
7-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
8-Jun-12 Rupp travel time
Flight (withlayover inAtlanta)from NewOrleans toDC 6.50
8-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
9-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 11 of 32
10-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.70
10-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.75
10-Jun-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
motion toadjustschedule 0.90
11-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.90
11-Jun-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
motion tomodifyschedulingorders 0.50
12-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
13-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
15-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.00
16-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
18-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.50
18-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
internal PVdiscussion 0.50
18-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
19-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
19-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
20-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
20-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 12 of 32
21-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
22-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
22-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
22-Jun-12 RuppAttend courtconference
statusconference 1.00
22-Jun-12 RuppReview andrevise draft SJ 1.60
23-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
25-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
26-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.70
26-Jun-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.80
27-Jun-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
28-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
29-Jun-12 RuppReview andrevise draft SJ SOF 1.70
29-Jun-12 RuppReview andrevise draft SJ memo 1.30
29-Jun-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
30-Jun-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
2-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
2-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft SJ SOF 0.70
2-Jul-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails SJ brief 1.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 13 of 32
3-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.70
5-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
5-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn to SOSmotion forextension oftime toopposemotions forSJ 0.50
6-Jul-12 RuppAttend courtconference 0.50
6-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
6-Jul-12 RuppReview andanalyze 1.00
7-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
8-Jul-12 Rupp Draft 0.80
8-Jul-12 Rupp Draftmotion toextend time 2.00
8-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn to SOSmotion tocompel 0.60
9-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
9-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn to SOSmotion tocompel 0.80
9-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
motion forextension oftime 0.20
10-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
10-Jul-12 Rupp Draft
motion &order toquashsubpoenaduces tecum 0.90
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 14 of 32
10-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
memo insupport ofmotion toquashsubpoenaduces tecum 0.80
11-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
12-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.70
12-Jul-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
12-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn to SOSmotion toextenddiscovery 0.50
13-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
13-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn tomotion tocompel 1.20
13-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re:opposition tomotion tocompel 0.40
13-Jul-12 RuppAttorneywork product
re: SOScatalog ofobjections 0.50
14-Jul-12 Rupp Research 2.00
14-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re:opposition tomotion tocompel 0.20
14-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
opposition tomotion tocompel 2.00
14-Jul-12 RuppAttorneywork product 0.40
15-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
16-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
opposition tomotion tocompel 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 15 of 32
17-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
17-Jul-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
18-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
18-Jul-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
19-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft 0.80
19-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
20-Jul-12 RuppAttend courtconference
telephonicstatusconference 0.50
20-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
20-Jul-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
22-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
22-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft letter 0.20
23-Jul-12 Rupp draft e-mail
to co-counsel re:protectingsensitivefinancial info 0.10
23-Jul-12 RuppAttorneywork product
legalresearch re:protectingsensitivefinancial info 1.40
23-Jul-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 1.30
23-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andrevise draftdiscoveryresponses
to SOS 3rdRFP 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 16 of 32
24-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
24-Jul-12 RuppReview andanalyze
discoverymaterials 0.70
24-Jul-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
opposition to2nd motionto compel 5.50
25-Jul-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
25-Jul-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
26-Jul-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
26-Jul-12 RuppReview andanalyze
documentspertaining toNAACPfinancials 1.00
27-Jul-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
31-Jul-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.20
1-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
2-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
2-Aug-12 RuppAttorneywork product
working onexhibit list 1.50
3-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
3-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.90
6-Aug-12 RuppAttorneywork product witness chart 5.20
8-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
intro callwith FF 1.10
9-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 17 of 32
10-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
13-Aug-12 RuppAttorneywork product 0.20
13-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.10
13-Aug-12 RuppAttorneywork product
DCFSwitness chart 1.32
13-Aug-12 RuppAttorneywork product exhibit list 1.60
14-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.50
14-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.20
15-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
16-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
re: D's oppn& our reply 1.00
16-Aug-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
17-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.80
18-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
18-Aug-12 Rupp Draftmotion tostrike 4.00
19-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
20-Aug-12 Rupp Draftmotion tostrike 1.10
20-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.60
21-Aug-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.70
21-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.90
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 18 of 32
21-Aug-12 RuppReview andrevise draft 0.70
22-Aug-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.20
22-Aug-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
motion tostrike 0.80
23-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.20
23-Aug-12 RuppReview andrevise draft SJ 1.60
24-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.50
25-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.10
26-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
26-Aug-12 RuppReview andrevise draft SJ 2.70
27-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.50
28-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
28-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
28-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
28-Aug-12 Rupp
Review andrevise draftreply motion SJM 2.30
29-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.20
30-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 3.00
31-Aug-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 19 of 32
31-Aug-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
2-Sep-12 Rupp Research 2.00
2-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.50
2-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andrevise draftreply motion 0.60
3-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.80
3-Sep-12 Rupp
Participateinpreparationfor oralargument
moot forDale 2.00
3-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft 1.00
3-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn to SOSmotion tostrikeevidence onPs reply tomotion forSJ 0.30
4-Sep-12 Rupp travel time
DC toNOLA;includeslayover 6.00
4-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
5-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
statusconference 0.10
5-Sep-12 RuppAttend courtconference
statusconference 2.30
6-Sep-12 Rupp travel time
NOLA toDC; includeslayover 7.50
6-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.30
7-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.50
8-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 20 of 32
9-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft injunction 1.10
10-Sep-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
10-Sep-12 Rupp Draft exhibit list 4.00
10-Sep-12 RuppAttorneywork product 0.60
10-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
11-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.30
11-Sep-12 Rupp Draft exhibit list 7.50
12-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.50
12-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
list ofcontinuingviolations asrequested byopposingcounsel 0.50
12-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft exhibit list 5.80
13-Sep-12 Rupp Draft exhibit list 4.50
13-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft injunction 1.00
13-Sep-12 RuppAttorneywork product
order ofproof / depoexcerpts 3.80
13-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
14-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.90
14-Sep-12 Rupp Draft letter
to Ds re:additionalexhibits 0.10
15-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails PTO 1.00
15-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft PTO 3.00
16-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.70
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 21 of 32
16-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft PTO 1.70
17-Sep-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
17-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.90
17-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft PTO 1.90
18-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
18-Sep-12 RuppReview andanalyze 0.75
18-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft PTO 3.00
18-Sep-12 RuppAttorneywork product
reviewingexhibits forobjections 1.30
18-Sep-12 RuppReview andanalyze PTO insert 1.30
19-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
19-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft exhibit list 2.10
19-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft PTO 2.30
19-Sep-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
19-Sep-12 RuppReview andanalyze PTO insert 2.00
20-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
21-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.30
22-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.40
23-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.80
23-Sep-12 RuppReview andanalyze PTO 1.60
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 22 of 32
24-Sep-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.50
24-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft letter 0.20
25-Sep-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
25-Sep-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
25-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
26-Sep-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.50
26-Sep-12 RuppAttorneywork product
chart of factsDefendantspreviouslyadmitted,now deny 5.80
26-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
27-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.10
27-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
proposedFOF 3.50
28-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.60
29-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.20
29-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft FOF&COL 4.00
30-Sep-12 RuppReview andrevise draft COL 0.60
30-Sep-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails 0.40
1-Oct-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
w/ Skip re:PTO 0.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 23 of 32
1-Oct-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 0.90
1-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.60
2-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
proposedinjunction 1.40
2-Oct-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.20
2-Oct-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
re: trialexhibits 0.30
2-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.50
3-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.70
3-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
motions inlimine 1.50
4-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
motion inlimine 0.20
4-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.30
4-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft COL 3.20
5-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.60
5-Oct-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
6-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
6-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product
witnessoutlines prep 4.50
7-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
8-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
8-Oct-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
re: witness &trial 1.00
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 24 of 32
9-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.80
10-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.00
10-Oct-12 Rupp Draft
Brookswitnessoutline 1.30
10-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn to SOSomnibus 0.50
11-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.60
11-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
Brookwitnessoutline 0.40
11-Oct-12 RuppAttendmeeting
direct/crossprep w/ FF&LDF viateleconference 3.00
11-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn tojudicialnotice 0.30
11-Oct-12 Rupp Research
oppn tojudicialnotice 0.70
12-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 1.50
12-Oct-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.00
13-Oct-12 Rupp travel time
from DC toNOLA;includeslayover +drive fromBiloxi 7.00
13-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product
trying to gettrial prepboxes fromFedEx b/cthey weren'tdelivered asscheduled 1.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 25 of 32
13-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product
trial prep -discussing/practicingMotions inLimine 1.50
13-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product
reviewingDale'sopening andopeningcharts;makingsuggestionsforimprovement 0.40
13-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:opening &charts 0.20
14-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.20
14-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product
trial prep,includingorganizing ofexhibits andtrial binders,as well asexaminationpractice 8.00
15-Oct-12 RuppAttend courtconference
trial: 8:25am-12pm,1:35pm-6pm 8.00
15-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product trial prep 5.00
16-Oct-12 RuppAttend courtconference
trial: 8:10am-12:30pm,2:10pm-5:20pm 7.50
16-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product trial prep 4.80
17-Oct-12 RuppAttend courtconference
trial: 8:35am-11:50am,1:30pm-2pm 3.75
19-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails 0.10
19-Oct-12 Rupp Research 0.40
19-Oct-12 Rupp travel timefrom NOLAto DC 5.50
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 26 of 32
20-Oct-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:standingresearch 0.10
21-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:post-trialbrief 0.10
22-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: casecaption 0.10
22-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: post-trialbrief outline 0.10
23-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:preliminarytrialtranscripts 0.10
23-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:case caption 0.10
24-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:motion toadmit factsfrom D'sSMFs 0.10
25-Oct-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
re: casecaption 0.10
25-Oct-12 Rupp ResearchScottstanding 5.00
25-Oct-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
re: motion toadmit factsfrom D'sSMFs 0.20
25-Oct-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
re: erratasheet 0.10
26-Oct-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
re: casecaption 0.10
26-Oct-12 Rupp Draft
section onScottstanding forpost-trialbrief 1.40
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 27 of 32
26-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: motion toadmit factsfrom D'sSMFs 0.30
26-Oct-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
re: erratasheet 0.10
26-Oct-12 RuppAttendmeeting
re: edits topost trialbrief 0.30
26-Oct-12 Rupp Draft
section onScottstanding forpost-trialbrief 1.40
29-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: post-trialbrief 0.20
29-Oct-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
Scottstanding 2.00
31-Oct-12 RuppAttorneywork product
chart ofobjections +checkingtranscript forerrors 2.30
31-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: erratasheets 0.30
31-Oct-12 Rupp draft e-mail
to intern re:judicialnotice 0.10
31-Oct-12 Rupp Researchstandingissues 4.70
31-Oct-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: post-trialbrief 0.30
1-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: post-trialbrief 0.90
1-Nov-12 Rupp ResearchPost-trialbrief 1.20
1-Nov-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
post-trialbrief 0.40
2-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:post-trialbrief 0.20
2-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:errata sheets 0.10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 28 of 32
2-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ intern re:judicialnotice 0.20
3-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:stipulation &errata sheet 0.10
4-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: closingppt & to-dolist 0.20
5-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: post-trialbrief &closing ppt 0.20
7-Nov-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
re: motion toamendcaption 0.10
8-Nov-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam 1.30
8-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: post trialbrief 0.30
8-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: casecaption (andresponse toSOS) 0.20
9-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: exhibitsfor post-trialbrief 0.20
9-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re:stipulations 0.10
9-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: closingtrialdemonstrative 0.10
9-Nov-12 Rupp
Participatein telephoneconferencecall
re: exhibitsfor post-trialbrief 0.40
9-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: erratasheet 0.10
9-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:post-trialexhibits 0.10
9-Nov-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
post-trialbrief 2.20
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 29 of 32
9-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
re: changeof casecaptionchange (&response toSOS) 0.40
12-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:post-trialbrief 0.40
13-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:post-trialbrief 0.20
13-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:case caption 0.10
14-Nov-12 RuppAttorneywork product
dealing withexhibits forpost-trialbrief 0.30
14-Nov-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
post-trialbrief 1.10
14-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:post-trialbrief 0.20
15-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:post-trialbrief 0.30
15-Nov-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
post-trialbrief 1.90
15-Nov-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
re: post-trialbriefing 0.50
16-Nov-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
from Dale &Sarah re:post-trialbriefing 0.10
19-Nov-12 Rupp
Reviewvarious e-mails
from Dalere:Defendant'spost-trialbrief 0.10
20-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:Defendants'post-trialbriefs 0.10
20-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:objection tocaptionchange 0.10
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 30 of 32
27-Nov-12 RuppAttendmeeting
w/ Niyati andSarah re:oppn motiontoDefendants'objection topost-trialevidence 0.50
27-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:oppn motiontoDefendants'objection topost-trialevidence 0.20
28-Nov-12 Rupp
Telephoneconferencecall withteam
re: oppnmotion toDefendants'objection topost-trialevidence 0.70
29-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:oppn motiontoDefendants'objection topost-trialevidence 0.20
29-Nov-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn motiontoDefendants'objection topost-trialevidence 1.50
30-Nov-12 RuppReview andrevise draft
oppn motiontoDefendants'objection topost-trialevidence 0.30
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 31 of 32
30-Nov-12 Rupp
Review andexchange e-mails
w/ litigationteam re:oppn motiontoDefendants'objection topost-trialevidence 0.30
TOTAL 560
37.5 of which is travel
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-20 Filed 02/26/13 Page 32 of 32
Exhibit E - K. Gerlach Time Records
Date
Task and
description Last name Hours
1-5-2011
researchmedicaidapplications Gerlach 5
1-6-2011
researchSNAPapplications Gerlach 5
4-May-12
Attendmeeting Gerlach 2.00
7-2-2012
researchregardingdata forSum. Judge Gerlach 7
7-12-2012
research LAcensus data Gerlach 3
TOTAL 22
(no travel billed)
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-21 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 1
DATE DESCRIPTION COST
2012/2011 -
621.25
11,860.15
12,828.86
Postage & Courier
Airfare
Project Vote1350 I Street, N.W., Ste 1250
Washington, DC 20005
Lodging
OFF: 888.546.4173 FAX: 202.629.3754
EML: [email protected]
JOB
New Orleans, Louisiana - Ferrand vs Schedler
Research Fees
4,102.58
101.95
848.13
540.00
226.03
-
31,128.95$
Supplies
TOTAL
Ground transportation
Printing
Other Professional Services
Other Expense
Exhibit FCase 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-22 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 2
Louisiana - Project code 180
Date
Research
Fees Date Paid
Postage &
Courier Date paid Airfare Date paid Lodging Date paid
Ground
transportation Date paid
Other
Expense Date Paid Printing Date Paid
Other
Professional
Services Date paid Supplies Total
9/30/2012 352.23 1/31/2012 461.20 4/30/2012 221.68 1/6/2012 18.75 5/31/2012 12.95 12/31/2012 183.21 12/31/2012 226.0312/31/2012 242.63 4/30/2012 8.00 4/30/2012 221.68 3/1/2012 10.00 12/31/2012 129.78
4/30/2012 8.00 4/30/2012 221.68 5/31/2012 377.834/30/2012 563.20 5/31/2012 648.98 5/31/2012 112.944/30/2012 563.20 5/31/2012 648.98 5/31/2012 20.004/30/2012 374.10 5/31/2012 207.46 6/1/2012 157.605/31/2012 8.00 6/30/2012 389.82 6/1/2012 32.485/31/2012 8.00 6/30/2012 389.82 6/30/2012 776.215/31/2012 402.2 6/30/2012 389.82 7/31/2012 12.755/31/2012 402.2 7/31/2012 227.28 7/31/2012 318.69 10/31/2012 19.005/31/2012 402.2 7/31/2012 227.28 8/31/2012 462.45 10/31/2012 25.005/31/2012 8.00 8/31/2012 120.56 8/31/2012 66.00 10/31/2012 25.005/31/2012 636.20 9/30/2012 205.18 8/31/2012 119.63
9/30/2012 50.009/30/2012 16.009/30/2012 16.16
10/31/2012 10.0010/31/2012 10.0010/31/2012 55.0010/31/2012 24.00
5/31/2012 581.40 9/30/2012 205.18 12/31/2012 104.085/31/2012 8.00 9/30/2012 8.00 12/31/2012 60.005/31/2012 8.00 9/30/2012 157.63 12/31/2012 21.007/31/2012 8.00 9/30/2012 8.007/31/2012 7.00 9/30/2012 8.007/31/2012 623.20 9/30/2012 8.007/31/2012 368.40 10/31/2012 117.597/31/2012 8.00 10/31/2012 129.277/31/2012 661.20 10/31/2012 8.008/31/2012 8.00 10/31/2012 8.008/31/2012 406.20 10/31/2012 8.009/30/2012 360.70 10/31/2012 1,813.959/30/2012 360.70 10/31/2012 1,575.459/30/2012 403.70 10/31/2012 1,575.459/30/2012 353.20 10/31/2012 200.489/30/2012 353.20 10/31/2012 200.48
10/31/2012 308.2010/31/2012 486.20 10/31/2012 189.2810/31/2012 486.20 10/31/2012 189.2810/31/2012 486.2010/31/2012 144.60
6/10/2011 21.35 7/14/2011 379.10 3/25/2011 287.56 11/9/2011 20.00 11/21/2011 20.00 11/14/2011 535.14 2/2/2011 540.009/6/2011 5.04 11/10/2011 20.00 7/15/2011 137.67 11/11/2011 18.00
11/10/2011 492.68 11/15/2011 377.8311/15/2011 369.51 11/21/2011 545.5011/15/2011 370.60 12/22/2011 251.9012/22/2011 179.0012/22/2011 179.00
- 621.25 10,320.70 12,345.80 4,064.80 101.95 848.13 540.00 226.03 29,068.66
New Orleans - Project code 181
Date
Research
Fees Date
Postage &
Courier Date paid airfare Date paid lodging Date paid
ground
transportation Date paid other Date paid Printing Date paid
Other
Professional
Services Date paid Supplies Total
8/31/2012 341.20 9/30/2012 115.28 8/31/2012 6.009/30/2012 268.20 9/30/2012 8.00 9/30/2012 31.78
11/30/2012 269.70 12/31/2012 124.6011/30/2012 8.00 10/31/2012 117.5912/31/2012 4.95 10/31/2012 117.59
5/31/2012 631.405/31/2012 8.008/31/2012 8.00
- - 1,539.45 483.06 37.78 - - - - 2,060.29
GRAND TOTAL - 621.25 11,860.15 12,828.86 4,102.58 101.95 848.13 540.00 226.03 31,128.95
Exhibit FCase 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 446-22 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 2