Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 86.6 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 833 Words, 5,232 Characters
Page Size: 601 x 780 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/23666/356-5.pdf

Download Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona ( 86.6 kB)


Preview Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona
1 Stephen D. Hoffman, #13875
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
2 Phoenix Plaza Tower II
2929 North Central Avenue, Suite 1700
3 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2761
Telephone: (602) 385-1040
4 Facsimile: (602) 385-1051
5 Attorneys for Wong and World Nutrition
6
7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
‘ 8 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
9
10 MARLYN NUTRACEUTICALS, INC., No. CIV 02-1876 PHX-HRH
an Arizona corporation,
11
Plaintiff, AFFIDAVIT on STEPHEN D.
12 HOFFMAN IN SUPPORT OF THIRD-
VS· PARY PLAINTIFF WORLD
13 . NUTRITION’S MOTION Fon
WILLIAM WONG and JANE DOE ATTORNEYS’ FEES
14 WONG, husband and wife; PATRICK .
- BUEHL and JANE DOE BUEHL» i (Assigned to The Honorable
15 hUSbE1I'Id 3Hd WIIICQ Russell Holland)
NUTRITION, INC., an Arizona
16 corporation; ABC Corporations I-X;
XYZ PARTNERSHIPS I-X; and JOHN
17 DOES I-X and JANE DOES I-X,
18 husbands and wives, respectively, ·
#9 Defendants,
WORLD NUTRITION, INC., an Arizona
20 corporation,
21 Third Party Plaintiff/Counterclaimand
Defendant,
22
vs.
23
MARLYN NUTRACEUTICALS, INC.,
24 an Arizona Corporation; and CRAIG
2 KNOBLOCH,
5
Counterdefendant/Plaintiff/Third
26 Party Defendant.
27 .
28
sie@002>·¤v—O1876—HRH Document 356-5 Filed O3/27/2008 Page 1 of 3

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
1 STATE OF ARIZONA ) - -
2 County of Maricopa g S-
3 Stephen D. Hoftinan, being first duly sworn, says:
2 1. I am a partner in the law firm of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP ("the
6 Firm"), the attorneys of record for third-party plaintiff World Nutrition, Inc. in this matter.
7 2. I am one of the attorneys responsible for the handling of this matter, and have
8 personal knowledge of the legal services rendered by the iirm.
9 3. I billed 48.1 hours through April 30, 2006, in connection with the third-party
10 complaint portion of this matter. I have been licensed to practice law in Arizona since 1991.
1 1 Presently, the majority of my practice involves civil and commercial litigation.
E 4. Scott Andersen was a former associate attorney of mine who assisted me on this
14 matter. Mr. Andersen billed 4.3 hours through April 30, 2006, in connection with the third-party
15 complaint portion of this matter. Mr. Andersen has been licensed to practice law in Arizona since A
16 2000. Mr. Andersen’s experience was in litigation.
17 5. Darwin Barney was a fonner associate attorney of mine who assisted me on this
18 matter. Mr. Barney billed 6.3 hours through April 30, 2006, in connection with the third—party
19 complaint portion of this matter. Mr. Bamey has been licensed to practice law since 2003 and in
2 Arizona since 2005. Mr. Bamey's experience was in litigation.
22 7. Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co. agreed to pay the Firm based on an hourly billing rate
23 of $ 140 for attorneys. These rates are more than reasonable and customary for attorneys in the
24 community with comparable training, experience, and skill. The rates are also more than reasonable
25 considering the difficulty of the work performed, the time and skill required, the responsibility
26 imposed and the results obtained.
27 _ r
28 I
géggégghgv-01876-HRH Document 356-§ Filed O3/27/2008 Page 2 of 3

LEWIS Bmseons BISGAARD & smm-1 LLP
1 8. Attached as Exhibit 2 to the Memorandum in Support of World Nutrition's Motion
2 for Award of Attorneys' Fees is a task-based iternization of the legal services rendered in connection
3 with the third-party complaint portion of this matter through April 30, 2006. This itemization was
4 .
produced from billing records which are regularly prepared in the course ofthe finn's business. I
5
6 have reviewed this itemization and the records from which it was produced, and the time and·
7 charges it reflects. In my opinion, the amounts of time billed are for services that were necessary,
- 3 and the time spent is not duplicative or excessive. The itemization does not include descriptions of
9 privileged communications. If requested, these descriptions will be submitted to the Court for in
10 camera inspection. All of the charges set forth in the itemization were submitted to and paid by
11 Atlantic Mutual [ns. Co., or are expected to be paid in due course.
12
9. In cormection with the third—party complaint portion of this matter, $8,218.00 in
13
14 attorneys' fees were incurred through August 30, 2006.
15 11. The services described above and in Exhibit 2 above were actually, reasonably and
16 necessarily expended in connection with this matter.
17 DATED March 27, 2008.
18 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
19
20 " Stephen D. Hoffman
21
22 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME March 27, 2008.
23 Jvaa-4,x
Notary Public ,
24 `·
My Commission Expires:
__•» 'e__ _
25 Q; · r ·· Mltrrassaasa
26 26-. 11 I ,).60 numnv PUBLIC —Sm¤¤fAr1¤¤¤¤
Q. `?';¢* MAFHCGPA GOUNTY
27 "*** l- My c¤mm.Exp1res Fet:.21.20¤9
28
A Qv20I§2aqv—O1876—HRH Document 356-5 Filed O3/27/2008 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-01876-HRH

Document 356-5

Filed 03/27/2008

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-01876-HRH

Document 356-5

Filed 03/27/2008

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-01876-HRH

Document 356-5

Filed 03/27/2008

Page 3 of 3