Opinion
Civil Action No. 93-C-2688-S
April 5, 2001
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES
This case started in December of 1993. It was tried for five days in October-November of 1995. Plaintiff prevailed at trial. Defendant's appeal and Plaintiffs cross-appeal to the Eleventh Circuit were unsuccessful.
The case has been hotly contested, from beginning to end. Several motions for sanctions have been filed. At one point, Defendant sought to depose Plaintiffs attorneys. Defendant unsuccessfully sought a writ of mandamus against the judge. Counsel for both parties have at times unreasonably pursued or resisted discovery.
The Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs application for attorneys' fees in April of 1998, and partial attorneys' fees were awarded at that time. In this Opinion, the Court disposes of the remaining aspects of the attorneys' fees application.
1. Plaintiffs Efforts and Success
Brought and maintained by the then-discharged Plaintiff individually, had this case been certified as a class action, it could not have been more beneficial to Defendant's female workforce. At trial, Plaintiff exposed outrageous conduct directed at female workers by male workers and supervisors in the workplace at Defendant's chicken plant in Blountsville, Alabama. The jury was so moved by the reprehensibility of the workplace atmosphere that it returned a punitive damage award of $8,000,000 against Defendant. Plaintiff individually obtained all the relief that she could legally and equitably obtain under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII") — reinstatement, $323,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. On November 3, 1995, Defendant, its "managers, supervisors, employees, and those in active concert and participation with them [were] PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from maintaining the existence of a sexually hostile work environment for the female employees . . . ." (Fin. Judgmt. Perm. Inj. at 1.)
But before the ink was dry on the first Injunction, Defendant began retaliating against some of Plaintiffs trial witnesses. Plaintiffs counsel was obliged to file a Motion for an Order to Show Cause. On November 8, 1995, the Court held an evidentiary hearing on Plaintiffs Show Cause Motion.
Based on the evidence adduced at the Show Cause hearing, the Court issued, on the same day, an Anti-Retaliation Injunction against Defendant, permanently enjoining it from retaliating against Plaintiff and other employees because of their "direct or indirect support of plaintiffs position in this case or their opposition to perceived unlawful employment practices based on sex at [Defendant]'s Blountsville Plant." (Anti-Retaliation Inj. at 1.) Defendant was ordered to post the following Notice at each of the time clocks, bulletin boards, management offices, break rooms, and eating facilities of the Blountsville facility. Because the Notice is fairly descriptive of what this lawsuit was about and what it achieved, the Notice is reproduced here:
In 1993, a former worker of the Company, Ms. Janice Dumas, filed a lawsuit claiming that the workplace here at Tyson is unfair, insulting, embarrassing, disrespectful, and humiliating for the female workers. This is what is known in law as a claim of a "sexually hostile work environment." A sexually hostile work environment is unlawful. The case was tried by a federal court jury in Birmingham in November 1995.
Mrs. Dumas won the case.
Federal Judge U.W. Clemon has now issued a court order telling the Company to stop and discontinue any actions that discriminate against women on the basis of sex. This means that in the future, the men workers and supervisors must treat the women workers just as they would want their mothers and sisters to be treated on a job. If Tyson does not follow the court order, it will be held in contempt of court and it may be exposed to a heavy fine or its managers may be sent to jail.
From now on, ANY MALE SUPERVISOR OR EMPLOYEE WHO SUBJECTS A FEMALE WORKER TO SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE (including production lines, break rooms, cafeteria, restrooms) WHETHER BY WORDS (such as "bitch," "whore," "sweetheart," or "darling") OR CONDUCT (such as touching a woman's body, embracing her, kissing her, exposing his private parts, simulating a sex act by use of chicken parts or otherwise) WILL BE PROMPTLY REPRIMANDED, SUSPENDED, AND/OR FIRED. Any such supervisor or employee may also be held in contempt.
Also, THE COMPANY WILL PROMPTLY REPRIMAND, SUSPEND, OR FIRE ANY EMPLOYEE, MALE OR FEMALE, WHO THREATENS, ABUSES, OR INTIMIDATES AN EMPLOYEE WHO EITHER TESTIFIED FOR MRS. DUMAS OR SUPPORTED HER CASE. It is unlawful and a violation of the court order to retaliate against anyone because he or she helped another person on a sex discrimination claim.
* * *
THE COMPANY ENCOURAGES ANY FEMALE WORKER WHO FEELS THAT SHE HAS BEEN HARASSED, RETALIATED OR OTHERWISE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST BECAUSE OF HER SEX, OR ANYONE WHO IS A WITNESS TO SEXUAL HARASSMENT OR DISCRIMINATION TO MAKE A COMPLAINT DIRECTLY TO THE PLANT MANAGER OR SHIFT MANAGER.
NO ONE WILL BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE HE OR SHE HAS MADE SUCH A COMPLAINT.Id.
Thus, this litigation achieved all the relief that the law provides in terms of transforming Defendant's pervasive sexually hostile work environment into one which accords respect to the basic humanity of its female workers.
II. Reasonable Hourly Rates Alicia Haynes has practiced law in the Northern District of Alabama since 1987, specializing in employment cases. If Haynes had been retained to represent a Title VII defendant in 1998, she would have billed at an hourly rate of $175-190. Because she worked on a contingency basis and achieved significant results, the Court finds that a reasonable hourly rate for her is $215, in light of similar awards made by this judge in similar cases.Larry Mann has practiced in the Northern District of Alabama since 1992. Before entering private practice, he had worked for a decade in a para-legal capacity with two law firms specializing in plaintiffs' cases. As co-counsel with Haynes, he successfully represented a plaintiff in another employment case in this Court, which resulted in a jury verdict of $887,000. If Mann had been retained to represent a Title VII defendant in 1998, he would have billed at $150-160 hourly. The contingency of his fee arrangement, similar awards by this judge, and success factors of Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, 488 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974), justify an upward adjustment of his hourly rate to $190.
Attorneys' travel time should be compensated at an hourly rate of $100.
Elizabeth R. Jones has practiced law for nearly two decades. She specializes in appellate work. Rejecting out of hand Defendant's contention that she should be compensated at the rate of $100 hourly, (Def. Obj. to Pla.'s App, for Attys Fees, at 25), the Court finds that a reasonable hourly rate for her services is $225.
Wendy Nix Thornton was a third-year law student in Alicia Haynes' firm when she provided services in this case as a Title VII litigation assistant, effectively a para-legal. A reasonable hourly rate for her services is $30.
Beth Gann is a para-legal in Alicia Haynes' office, having received her baccalaureate degree in para-legal studies from Samford University. Before her employment by Haynes Haynes, she worked at two of the major law firms in the Northern District of Alabama. The Court finds that a reasonable hourly rate for her services is $60.
III. Hours Reasonably Expended
Presumably after exercising their billing judgment, counsel for Defendant billed their client for 3,662.87 hours for representation in this case. Plaintiffs attorneys have sworn to the Court that they have reasonably expended 4,121 hours in the successful prosecution of this case. On its face, the number of hours claimed by Plaintiffs counsel is not unreasonable. After all, as a general proposition, it takes more effort to win than it takes to lose. Nonetheless, the Court has carefully considered each of Defendant's myriad objections. Upon such deliberate consideration, the Court's conscience is soothed, rather than shocked. Cf Fair Housing Council of Greater Washington v. Landow, 999 F.2d 92 (4th Cir. 1993); Lewis v. Kendrick, 944 F.2d 949 (lst Cir. 1991); Brown v. Stackler, 612 F.2d 1057 (7th Cir. 1980).
As reflected in Attachment "A," the Court has in part sustained the Defendant's objections and reduced the claimed hours, which in the Court's "Monday morning quarterbacking," appear to be redundant, excessive, or inadequately documented or explained. It has disallowed the hours that were exclusively expended in pressing Plaintiffs claim against Defendant Brumblow in his individual capacity and the state law claims. It has disallowed the time expended on Plaintiffs unemployment compensation claim. It has disallowed the hours claimed for Title VII seminars. It has disallowed the hours attributable to the failure of Plaintiffs counsel to initially comply with the page limitations of the Eleventh Circuit. Moreover, it has reduced the time allocable to Plaintiffs unsuccessful cross-appeal. As a result, the Court has reduced the total hours claimed to a number below that expended by Defendant's counsel — so that in this case, the Court finds that it took fewer hours to win than it took to lose.
Defendant makes too much of plaintiffs state law claims. All of the evidence heard by the jury on the state law claims was entirely relevant to the Title VII claim of a hostile work environment. If Defendant's supervisor Jimmy Brumblow had not been sued by Plaintiff for violations of the laws of Alabama in this case, Plaintiff would have offered to the jury his same uncivilized conduct which contributed substantially to an unbelievably hostile work environment for female employees at Tyson. It was a "same evidence anyway" presentation, with or without the state law claims and the individual claims against Jimmy Brumblow. The same operative facts were involved. See Davis v. Locke, 936 F.2d 1208, 1214 (1lth Cir. 1991).
Defendant also overlooks that while several of Plaintiffs witnesses had separate claims, the evidence that they presented at the trial of this case bore directly on the existence vel non of a sexually hostile work environment. It is completely irrelevant that subsequently they may have used some of this evidence in their individual cases against Defendant.
Alicia Haynes has claimed 2057.6 hours in this case. Based on Defendant's objections, the Court has disallowed 85.50 of her claimed hours, and it has disallowed 35 hours (travel time) at the lodestar rate. See Attachment "A" at 10, infra. It has disallowed a fourth (61 hours) of her appellate hours based on the unsuccessful cross-appeal. The Court will credit an additional four hours for her preparation and participation at the hearing on attorneys' fees. The Court finds that she has reasonably expended 1880.10 regular hours in the prosecution of this case, and that she has expended 35 hours of travel time.
Larry Mann claims a total of 1651.5 hours in this case. Based on Defendant's objections, the Court has disallowed 447.45 of those hours. Id. It has disallowed another 35 of those hours (travel hours) at the lodestar rate. It has disallowed 3.75 of his appellate hours as duplicative or unsatisfactorily explained, and it reduced his appellate hours by a fourth (40 hours) because of the cross-appeal. The Court will credit an additional four hours for his preparation for and participation in the hearing on attorneys' fees. The Court finds that he has reasonably expended 1129.30 regular hours in the prosecution of this case and that he has expended 35 hours in travel time.
Wendy Nix claims 265.95 hours in this case. The Court has disallowed 9.50 of those hours, based on Defendant's well-founded objections. Id. She is entitled to 256.45 hours.
Elizabeth Jones claims 147 hours for her trial and appellate work in this case. Based on Defendant's objections, the Court has disallowed 5 hours (state law claims) of her claimed time in the district court; 11.75 of her appellate hours (re-editing the appellate brief to conform to the Appellate Rules); and another 27.5 hours (for time allocable to the cross-appeal). She is allowed 102.7 hours for her work in this case.
Alicia Haynes claims 694.5 hours for her para-legal, Beth Gann. The Court finds merit in Defendant's objections to 16.90 of those hours. The Court finds that Gann reasonably expended 677.60 hours of para-legal service.
At the conclusion of the attorneys' fee hearing in April of 1998, based on the number of hours stipulated by Defendants, Alicia Haynes was paid $175,000 and Larry Mann $125,000 by Defendant, pursuant to the order of the Court.
In summary, the Court finds 3314.80 hours to have been reasonably expended in the prosecution of this case, allocated as follows:
Alicia Haynes........... 1880.10 regular hours plus 35 hours travel time Larry Mann.............. 1129.30 regular hours plus 3 hours travel time Elizabeth Jones......... 102.7 regular hours
The Court finds that Beth Gann reasonably expended 6777.60 hours and that Wendy Nix Thornton reasonably expended 256.45 hours in assisting the Plaintiffs lawyers.
IV. Interest/Enhancement For Delay
Plaintiffs counsel are entitled to a reasonable rate of interest on the attorneys' fees that are owed to them. Defendant has had actual use of the principal sum since April of 1997 and/or the opportunity of earning a reasonable rate of interest on it. The Court finds that a 7% compound interest rate should be utilized — resulting in a 22% enhancement.
V. Costs
Plaintiff seeks $34,206.37 in her Bill of Costs. The Court has disallowed many of the items.
See Attachment "B"at 41 infra.
The Court allows witness fees for all summoned witnesses, regardless of whether they actually testified at trial. It approves the claim for enlargements ("blow-ups") of exhibits used at trial. It allows for the copying costs of papers necessarily obtained for use in the case, but it disallows the copying costs of general filed pleadings, such as Plaintiffs Proposed Rule 26 Disclosures. It approves the deposition expenses for deponents who testified at trial; it disallows them for deponents who did not testify at trial. It approves Mark McKnight's fee for obtaining the order quashing deposition notices served on Plaintiffs counsel. It approves Plaintiffs counsel's mediation expenses. It allows the costs for service of subpoenas on witnesses who would not produce or accept service. The Court disallows the expert witness fee, the filing fee for cross-appeal, and the Westlaw research fee.
The Court concludes that costs in the amount of $23,508.35 should be taxed against Defendant.
Conclusion
By separate order, the findings incorporated in this Memorandum Opinion will be embodied in a Final Judgment Awarding Attorneys' Fees and Costs.
Attachment "A" DISPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS' OBJECTIONS TO HOURS CLAIMED
Entry Date Attorney Hours Ruling Hours Reason for Disallowance Disputed Allowed
10/20/93 Haynes 2.75 S 1.75 Duplicative/Redundant 11/17/93 Mann 3.25 S 1.25 Duplicative/Redundant 11/18/93 Haynes 3.00 S 2.00 Unrelated — state law claims 12/01/93 Haynes 5.75 1.90 Unrelated — state law claims 12/02/93 Haynes 4.00 1.30 Excessive — Bromblow claim 12/15/93 Haynes 4.75 S 2.75 Excessive — Bromblow claim 12/15/93 Mann 4.75 S 2.00 Duplicative/Redundant 01/07/94 Haynes 3.00 S 1.50 Duplicative/Redundant 01/07/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 01/18/94 Haynes 2.25 S 1.25 Excessive 01/21/94 Haynes 1.75 S 1.25 Excessive — Bromblow claim 02/01/94 Mann 1.00 S .3 Excessive — Bromblow claim 02/01/94 Mann 1.50 S 0 Excessive — Bromblow claim 02/01/94 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Discription 02/05/94 Mann 1.50 S 0 Inadequate Discription 02/10/94 Mann .50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 02/14/94 Haynes 1.00 .30 Excessive — Bromblow claim 02/14/94 Haynes .50 O .50 02/18/94 Haynes 1.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 03/03/94 Mann 1.00 S .50 Excessive — Bromblow claim 03/08/94 Mann .50 O .50 03/08/94 Haynes 5.75 O 5.75 03/13/94 Mann 3.25 S 2.00 Duplicative/Redundant 03/14/94 Mann 3.50 O 3.50 03/18/94 Mann .50 O .50 03/18/94 Mann 2.00 S 0 Inadequate Discription 03/21/94 Mann 5.75 S 3.00 Duplicative/Redundant 03/21/94 Haynes 5.75 S 0 Unrelated 03/22/94 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 03/27/94 Mann 1.25 S .75 Duplicative/Redundant 03/28/94 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 03/28/94 Haynes 3.00 O 3.00 03/29/94 Mann 3.25 S 1.00 Excessive/Inadequate Discription 03/30/94 Mann 2.00 S 0 Excessive/Inadequate Discription 03/30/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 03/31/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 04/01/94 Mann .25 O .25 04/04/94 Mann 5.00 S 2.00 Excessive/Duplicative/ Redundant 04/05/94 Haynes .50 0 Excessive — Bromblow claims 04/05/94 Mann 5.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 04/06/94 Mann 2.50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 04/06/94 Haynes 3.00 1.00 Excessive — Bromblow claims 04/08/94 Haynes .25 S 0 Unrelated 04/08/94 Mann .50 O .50 04/11/94 Mann 2.75 S 2.00 Unrelated/Duplicative/ Redundant 04/11/94 Haynes 2.75 S 2.00 Unrelated 04/12/94 Mann .50 S 0 Excessive/Duplicative/ Redundant 04/13/94 Mann .75 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 04/18/94 Gann 1.30 O 1.30 04/19/94 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 05/09/94 Mann .75 S .25 Duplicative/Redundant Excessive 05/17/94 Mann .50 S .25 Duplicative/Redundant Excessive 05/30/94 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 06/30/94 Mann 4.00 S 2.00 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant Excessive 06/06/94 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 06/10/94 Mann 2.00 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant 06/13/94 Haynes .50 O .50 06/13/94 Gann 3.00 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant Excessive 06/13/94 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 06/14/94 Mann .25 S 0 Inadequate Description 06/14/94 Haynes .50 S .25 Duplicative/Redundant 06/15/94 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 06/20/94 Mann 2.50 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant Excessive 06/22/94 Gann 1.60 O 1.60 06/23/94 Gann 2.50 O 2.50 06/27/94 Haynes 2.75 S 1.40 Excessive — Brumblow claims 06/27/94 Mann 2.50 O 2.50 07/01/94 Mann 1.00 S .10 Duplicative/Redundant 07/06/94 Gann 3.00 S 0 Unrelated 07/07/94 Gann 6.50 S 0 Unrelated 07/07/94 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 07/08/94 Mann .75 O .75 07/11/94 Haynes .75 O .75 07/11/94 Mann .75 S .25 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 07/12/94 Mann 4.50 O 4.50 07/12/94 Haynes .75 O .75 07/13/94 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 07/13/94 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 07/13/94 Mann 5.00 S 2.00 Duplicative/Redundant 07/14/94 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 07/19/94 Mann 3.00 S 0 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 07/19/94 Haynes 3.00 S 0 Unrelated 07/20/94 Haynes 6.00 S 0 Unrelated 07/20/94 Mann 8.50 S 0 Unrelated/Excessive Duplicative/Redundant 07/21/94 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 07/22/94 Mann .25 O .25 07/25/94 Mann 3.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 07/25/94 Haynes 6.00 O 6.00 07/25/94 Gann 1.00 S .10 Inadequate Description 07/26/94 Gann 1.00 O 1.00 07/27/94 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 08/02/94 Mann 2.25 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 08/08/94 Mann .75 O .75 08/09/94 Mann .25 S 0 Inadequate Description 08/10/94 Mann .75 S 0 Inadequate Description 08/15/94 Haynes .75 O .75 08/15/94 Mann .75 S 0 Inadequate Description 08/18/94 Mann .75 S .25 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 08/19/94 Mann 1.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 08/22/94 Mann 3.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant Excessive 08/24/94 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 08/24/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 08/24/94 Gann 8.00 O 8.00 08/24/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 08/24/94 Gann 2.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 08/24/94 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 08/25/94 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 08/25/94 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 08/25/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 08/25/94 Gann 8.00 O 8.00 08/25/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 08/26/94 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 08/26/94 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 08/26/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 08/26/94 Gann 8.00 O 8.00 08/26/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 08/29/94 Haynes 2.25 S 2.00 Duplicative/Redundant 08/30/94 Mann 4.50 O 4.50 09/01/94 Mann 1.50 S .50 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 09/07/94 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 09/07/94 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 09/07/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 09/07/94 Gann 8.00 O 8.00 09/07/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 09/07/94 Mann 9.50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 09/08/94 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 09/08/94 Gann 8.00 O 8.00 09/08/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 09/14/94 Mann 2.50 S 0 Unrelated/Clerical 09/14/94 Haynes .75 O .75 09/15/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 09/15/94 Mann 1.25 O 1.25 09/15/94 Mann 1.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 09/20/94 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 09/21/94 Haynes 3.50 O 3.50 09/21/94 Mann 3.50 O 3.50 09/22/94 Mann 1.50 S .75 Duplicative/Redundant 09/22/94 Haynes 1.75 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant 09/23/94 Haynes 1.50 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant 09/23/94 Gann 1.00 O 1.00 09/23/94 Mann .75 O .75 09/24/94 Haynes 2.50 O 2.50 09/26/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 09/26/94 Mann 1.00 O 1.00 09/28/94 Mann .25 O .25 09/28/94 Haynes 4.00 S 2.00 Excessive 09/28/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 10/03/94 Haynes 6.50 O 6.50 10/03/94 Mann 6.50 O 6.50 10/04/94 Mann 8.50 O 8.50 10/04/94 Haynes 8.50 O 8.50 10/04/94 Gann 3.00 O 3.00 10/05/94 Mann 4.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 10/06/94 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 10/07/94 Mann 5.00 S 2.00 Duplicative/Redundant 10/08/94 Mann 2.50 S 2.00 Duplicative/Redundant 10/10/94 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 10/10/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 10/10/94 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 10/12/94 Mann .50 S .10 Inadequate Discription 10/14/94 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Discription 10/14/94 Haynes .50 O .50 10/17/94 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 10/18/94 Mann 7.75 O 7.75 10/19/94 Gann 5.50 O 5.50 10/25/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 10/25/94 Mann .50 O .50 10/26/94 Mann 15.00 O 15.00 10/26/94 Mann 1.50 O 1.50 10/26/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 10/26/94 Gann 14.50 O 14.50 10/26/94 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 10/26/94 Mann 4.50 O 4.50 10/28/94 Mann 2.00 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Discription 10/31/94 Mann 5.00 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 10/31/94 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 10/31/94 Gann 4.50 O 4.50 11/02/94 Mann 2.50 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant 11/03/94 Mann .50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 11/04/94 Mann .75 S .20 Duplicative/Redundant 11/07/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 11/07/94 Gann 6.00 O 6.00 11/07/94 Gaun 7.00 O 7.00 11/08/94 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 11/11/94 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description 11/14/94 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 11/14/94 Mann 7.50 O 7.50 11/15/94 Mann 1.00 S .20 Inadequate Description 11/15/94 Haynes .75 S 0 11/18/94 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 11/18/94 Mann .75 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 11/23/94 Mann .75 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 11/28/94 Mann .25 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 11/28/94 Gann 4.50 O 4.50 11/30/94 Gann 2.50 O 2.50 12/01/94 Mann .75 O .75 12/02/94 Mann .50 S 0 Unrelated Inadequate Description 12/02/94 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 12/02/94 Gann 5.00 O 5.00 12/06/94 Mann 2.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 12/07/94 Mann 1.25 O 1.25 12/07/94 Haynes 1.25 O 1.25 12/08/94 Mann 4.00 S 0 Unecessary 12/09/94 Mann 1.00 S .20 Duplicative/Redundant 12/12/94 Haynes 3.25 O 3.25 12/12/94 Mann 10.00 O 10.00 12/13/94 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 12/13/94 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 12/13/94 Gann 6.40 O 6.40 02/14/94 Mann 12.50 O 12.50 12/15/94 Mann 4.75 O 4.75 12/16/94 Mann 1.50 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 12/17/94 Mann 1.00 S 0 Inadequate discription 12/21/94 Haynes .25 0 Excessive — bromblow claims 12/21/94 Mann .50 S .25 Duplicative/Redundant 12/22/94 Mann 1.50 S 0 Inadequate Discription Duplicative/Redundant 12/23/94 Haynes 1.50 O 1.50 12/23/94 Mann .75 S 0 Inadequate Description 12/31/94 Haynes 8.50 O 8.50 12/31/94 Mann 4.25 S .75 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 01/09/95 Gann 3.50 O 3.50 01/09/95 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 01/11/95 Mann 7.00 S 1.50 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 01/11/95 Haynes 3.50 O 3.50 01/12/95 Gann 2.80 O 2.80 01/12/95 Haynes 1.75 S .75 Unnecessary/Excessive 01/12/95 Mann 8.50 O 8.50 01/13/95 Mann 12.00 S 2.50 Excessive Duplicative/Redundant 01/16/95 Mann .50 S .20 Duplicative/Redundant 01/17/95 Mann 11.25 S 2.25 Excessive 01/17/95 Haynes 7.25 O 7.25 01/17/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 01/18/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 01/18/95 Haynes 2.25 S 1.25 Duplicative/Redundant 01/18/95 Mann 15.00 O 15.00 01/18/95 Gann 8.00 O 8.00 01/19/95 Mann 9.00 O 9.00 01/20/95 Mann 7.75 O 7.75 01/23/95 Mann 10.50 O 10.50 01/24/95 Mann 12.00 O 12.00 01/25/95 Mann 1.00 S .25 Duplicative/Redundant 01/26/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 01/26/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 01/26/95 Haynes 4.25 O 4.25 01/27/95 Haynes 6.00 S 3.00 Excessive 01/27/95 Mann 1.00 O 1.00 01/27/95 Mann 2.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 01/27/95 Gann 1.20 O 1.20 02/01/95 Mann 2.50 S 0 Inadequate Description 02/01/95 Mann 2.00 S .50 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 02/01/95 Haynes .50 O .50 02/03/95 Haynes .50 O .50 02/03/95 Haynes 3.00 1.00 Excessive — Brumblow claims 02/03/95 Mann .50 O .50 02/03/95 Mann 1.50 S 0 Inadequate Description 02/06/95 Mann .50 O .50 02/06/95 Mann .75 S .25 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 02/06/95 Gann 1.00 O 1.00 02/08/95 Mann 2.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 02/09/95 Mann .75 O .75 02/09/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 02/10/95 Nix 1.50 O 1.50 02/10/95 Mann .25 S 0 Inadequate Description 02/10/95 Gann 3.00 O 3.00 02/10/95 Gann 4.00 O 4.00 02/11/95 Gann 1.00 O 1.00 02/13/95 Gann 5.00 O 5.00 02/13/95 Mann 4.25 O 4.25 02/13/95 Haynes 5.25 O 5.25 02/13/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 02/15/95 Haynes 4.25 O 4.25 02/15/95 Mann 1.50 O 1.50 02/15/95 Mann 4.25 O 4.25 02/15/95 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 02/16/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 02/16/95 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 02/16/95 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 02/16/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 02/17/95 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 02/17/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 02/18/95 Mann 1.50 S 0 Inadequate Description 02/18/95 Haynes 3.50 S 1.20 Excessive — Brumblow claim, Unrelated 02/19/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 02/19/95 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 02/19/95 Mann .50 O .50 02/20/95 Mann 2.00 S 0 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 02/20/95 Mann 4.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 02/20/95 Mann 2.00 S 0 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 02/20/95 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 02/20/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 02/20/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 02/21/95 Mann .25 O .25 02/21/95 Mann 2.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 02/21/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 02/21/95 Mann 3.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 02/22/95 Mann 2.00 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant
02/24/95 Mann 4.00 S 0 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 02/27/95 Gann 3.00 O 3.00
02/28/95 Gann 3.50 O 3.50 03/02/95 Gann 6.00 O 6.00 03/03/95 Mann 3.00 S 1.00 Duplicative/Redundant 03/03/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 03/03/95 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description 03/04/95 Haynes 3.50 O 3.50 03/04/95 Mann 3.50 S 0 Inadequate Description 03/04/95 Mann 3.50 S .75 Duplicative/Redundant 03/06/95 Gann 3.00 O 3.00 Duplicative/Redundant 03/07/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 03/08/95 Mann 5.50 O 5.50 03/11/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 03/12/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 03/13/95 Mann .25 S 0 Inadequate Description 03/14/95 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 03/14/95 Mann 5.75 S 1.50 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 03/14/95 Mann 1.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 03/15/95 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 03/16/95 Nix 3.00 O 3.00 03/17/95 Haynes 4.25 S 0 Unrelated 03/17/95 Mann 4.25 S 0 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 03/17/95 Mann 4.25 S 0 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 03/18/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 03/18/95 Haynes 6.00 O 6.00 03/19/95 Mann 4.50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 03/20/95 Gann .70 O .70 03/21/95 Gann .60 O .60 03/21/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 03/22/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 03/22/95 Haynes 6.00 O 6.00 03/22/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 03/22/95 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 03/23/95 Haynes 7.50 O 7.50 03/23/95 Mann 7.50 O 7.50 03/24/95 Nix 3.00 O 3.00 03/24/95 Mann 1.00 S .50 03/24/95 Haynes 3.75 O 3.75 03/27/95 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 03/27/95 Mann 4.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 03/27/95 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 03/28/95 Gann 7.00 O 7.00 03/28/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 03/29/95 Haynes .75 O .75 03/29/95 Gann 7.50 O 7.50 03/30/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 03/31/95 Haynes 2.50 O 2.50 03/31/95 Mann .75 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 03/31/95 Mann 2.50 O 2.50 03/31/95 Gann .80 O .80 04/03/95 Gann 6.80 O 6.80 04/03/95 Mann 4.00 S 1.50 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 04/03/95 Haynes 6.50 O 6.50 04/03/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 04/04/95 Haynes 8.25 O 8.25 04/04/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 04/04/95 Gann 6.50 O 6.50 04/05/95 Gann 4.00 O 4.00 04/05/95 Mann .50 O .50 04/05/95 Mann .25 O .25 04/06/95 Mann .25 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 04/06/95 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 04/07/95 Haynes 3.50 O 3.50 04/08/95 Haynes 6.75 O 6.75 04/09/95 Haynes 7.00 O 7.00 04/09/95 Mann 7.00 O 7.00 04/09/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 04/10/95 Mann 12.00 O 12.00 04/10/95 Mann 1.50 O 1.50 04/10/95 Haynes 12.00 O 12.00 04/10/95 Haynes 1.50 O 1.50 04/10/95 Gann 3.50 O 3.50 04/11/95 Haynes 5.00 O 4.50 04/11/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 04/12/95 Mann 5.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 04/12/95 Haynes 5.25 O 5.25 04/12/95 Gann .30 O .30 04/14/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 04/14/95 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 04/17/95 Mann 5.00 S 1.50 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 04/17/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 04/18/95 Mann 4.25 S 0 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 04/19/95 Mann 2.75 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant Inadequate Description 04/20/95 Gann .60 O .60 04/20/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 04/25/95 Gann .50 O .50 04/26/95 Gann 4.00 O 4.00 04/26/95 Mann 2.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 04/26/95 Haynes 2.25 O 2.25 04/28/95 Mann 4.00 S 2.50 Duplicative/Redundant 05/01/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 05/02/95 Gann 3.00 O 3.00 05/03/95 Mann 7.25 O 7.25 05/05/95 Mann 4.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 05/08/95 Haynes 3.00 O 3.00 05/08/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 05/08/95 Mann 3.00 S .50 Unrelated 05/08/95 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 05/09/95 Haynes 1.50 O 1.50 05/10/95 Haynes 2.50 O 2.50 05/10/95 Haynes 6.00 O 6.00 05/10/95 Mann 2.00 O 2.00 05/10/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 05/11/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 05/11/95 Haynes 6.00 O 6.00 05/12/95 Haynes .75 O .75 05/12/95 Mann .75 S .25 Unrelated 05/12/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 05/13/95 Mann 4.00 S 2.00 Unrelated Duplicative/Redundant 05/13/95 Haynes 7.00 O 7.00 05/14/95 05/14/95 Haynes 2.75 O 2.75 05/15/95 Haynes 10.00 O 10.00 05/15/95 Mann 12.00 O 12.00 05/16/95 Mann 16.00 O 16.00 05/17/95 Mann .50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 05/17/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 05/18/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 05/18/95 Mann 4.50 O 4.50 05/18/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 05/19/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 05/19/95 Haynes 3.00 O 3.00 05/19/95 Mann 3.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 05/20/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 05/21/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 05/22/95 Gann 4.50 O 4.50 05/22/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 05/23/95 Haynes 1.50 O 1.50 05/23/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 05/23/95 Gann 4.30 O 4.30 05/24/95 Gann .50 O .50 05/24/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 05/24/95 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 05/15/95 Gann .30 O .30 05/25/95 Gann .30 O .30 05/30/95 Mann 2.50 S 1.50 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 05/30/95 Haynes .75 O .75 05/30/95 Gann .80 O .80 05/31/95 Haynes 2.25 O 2.25 05/31/95 Mann 1.50 O 1.50 06/01/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 06/02/95 Haynes 3.75 O 3.75 06/02/95 Haynes .25 O .25 06/02/95 Haynes .75 O .75 06/02/95 Mann 2.50 O 2.50 06/02/95 Mann .50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 06/02/95 Mann 5.00 S .50 Excessive 06/02/95 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 06/02/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 06/05/95 Mann 1.00 O 1.00 06/05.95 Gann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description 06/06/95 Mann 1.00 O 1.00 06/07/95 Mann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 06/07/95 Gann .40 O .40 06/08/95 Gann .25 O .25 06/09/95 Mann 3.00 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant Unrelated 06/09/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 06/12/95 Haynes .25 O .25 06/12/95 Mann .75 O .75 06/14/95 Haynes 1.25 O 1.25 06/14/95 Mann 1.25 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 06/15/95 Mann .50 O .50 06/15/95 Haynes 1.50 O 1.50 06/15/95 Haynes .50 O .50 06/16/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 06/22/95 Haynes .50 O .50 06/22/95 Mann .25 O .25 06/23/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 06/23/95 Mann 1.50 O 1.50 06/23/95 Haynes 1.50 O 1.50 06/25/95 Mann 3.00 S 0 Duplilcative/Redundant 06/25/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 06/26/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 06/26/95 Haynes 6.50 O 6.50 06/26/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 6/27/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 06/27/95 Mann .50 O .50 06/27/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 06/28/95 Haynes 1.25 O 1.25 06/28/95 Nix 8.00 S 0 Excessive 06/29/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 06/30/95 Mann .25 O .25 06/30/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 07/02/95 Gann 1.00 S 0 Inadequate Discription 07/03/95 Haynes .75 O .75 07/05/95 Mann 2.25 O 2.25 07/05/95 Mann 3.50 O 3.50 07/05/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 07/06/95 Mann 1.50 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 07/06/95 Mann 8.50 O 8.50 07/06/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 07/07/95 Haynes 6.00 O 2.50 Inadequate Description 07/07/95 mann 8.00 S 2.50 Inadequate Description 07/09/95 Gann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description 07/09/95 Gann .50 S 0 Inadequate Description 07/10/95 Mann 10.00 S 6.00 Excessive Duplicative/Redundant 07/10/95 Haynes 2.00 2.00 07/10/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 07/10/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 07/10/95 Haynes 2.00 S 0 Excessive 07/10/95 Haynes 2.00 S 0 Excessive 07/10/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 07/10/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 07/11/95 Mann 1.25 S .50 Duplicative/Redundant 07/12/95 Mann 2.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 07/14/95 Nix .50 O .50 07/17/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 07/18/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 07/19/95 Mann 5.50 O 5.50 07/21/95 Nix 2.50 O 2.50 07/24/95 Mann 1.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 07/26/95 Mann 8.00 S .75 Excessive Duplicative/Redundant 07/26/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 07/27/95 Mann 2.00 S 0 Excessive Duplicative/Redundant 07/27/95 Mann .75 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 07/27/95 Nix .25 O .25 07/28/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 07/28/95 Nix 1.50 O 1.50 07/31/95 Mann 10.00 S 4.00 Excessive Duplicative/Redundant 07/31/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 07/31/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 08/01/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 08/01/95 Mann 42.00 S 8.00 Duplicative/Redundant 08/09/95 Excessive 08/01/95 Haynes 92.75 S 16.00 Excessive 08/09/95 08/02/95 Mann 1.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 08/02/95 Nix 1.50 O 1.50 08/03/95 Haynes .75 O .75 08/03/95 Mann .50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 08/04/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 08/04/95 Nix 3.00 O 3.00 08/07/95 Mann .50 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 08/07/95 Gaun 2.50 O 2.50 08/07/95 Nix 1.50 O 1.50 08/09/95 Mann .25 O .25 08/14/95 Gann 1.80 O 1.80 08/14/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 08/15/95 Gann .60 O .60 08/16/95 Mann 5.00 S 0 Duplicative/Redundant 08/21/95 Haynes 1.25 .40 Excessive — Bromblow claims 08/21/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 08/22/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 08/23/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 08/25/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 08/25/95 Haynes .25 O .25 08/28/95 Haynes 9.25 O 9.25 08/28/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 08/29/95 Mann 8.50 O 8.50 08/29/95 Haynes 2.25 O 2.25 08/31/95 Mann 4.00 S 0 Inadequate Description 09/05/95 Haynes 2.25 .75 Unrelated Excessive — Brumblow claims 09/05/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 09/05/95 Gann 5.00 O 5.00 09/08/95 Mann 2.50 O 2.50 09/11/95 Haynes .50 O .50 09/11/95 Mann 5.00 S 2.50 Duplicative/Redundant 09/11/95 Gann 7.00 O 7.00 09/12/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 09/13/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 09/14/95 Mann 8.00 S 0 Inadequate Description Duplicative/Redundant 09/14/95 Haynes .50 0 Excessive — Brumblow claims 09/15/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 09/18/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 09/19/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 09/19/95 Gann 2.00 O 2.00 09/20/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 09/21/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 09/22/95 Mann 4.00 S 0 Inadequate Description 09/22/95 Haynes 4.00 0 4.00 09/25/95 Gann 2.50 0 2.50 09/29/95 Nix 3.00 0 3.00 10/02/95 Mann 8.00 0 8.00 10/02/95 Nix 2.00 0 2.00 10/03/95 Mann 8.00 0 8.00 10/04/95 Mann 5.00 0 5.00 10/04/95 Haynes 21.00 S 0 Excessive 10/06/95 10/04/95 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 10/04/95 Gann 6.30 O 6.30 10/04/95 Gann .40 O .40 10/05/95 Nix 6.00 O 6.00 10/06/95 Mann 6.00 S 2.50 Inadequate Description 10/06/95 Haynes .25 O .25 10/06/95 Haynes 2.00 S 0 Excessive 10/06/95 Haynes .25 O .25 10/06/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 10/06/95 Gann 5.00 O 5.00 10/06/95 Nix 3.00 O 3.00 10/08/95 Gann 3.00 O 3.00 10/09/95 Mann 8.25 O 8.25 10/10/95 Mann 4.25 O 4.25 10/10/95 Gann 2.50 O 2.50 10/10/95 Nix 1.50 O 1.50 10/11/95 Mann 4.00 S 0 Unrelated 10/11/95 Gaun 1.00 O 1.00 10/12/95 Gann 2.50 O 2.50 10/12/95 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 10/12/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 10/13/95 Mann 6.00 S 2.00 Duplicative/Redundant 10/13/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 10/14/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 10/14/95 Gann 3.00 O 3.00 10/15/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 10/15/95 Gaun 3.50 O 3.50 10/16/95 Mann .50 O .50 10/16/95 Mann 8.50 O 8.50 10/16/95 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 10/16/95 Gann 3.00 O 3.00 10/16/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 10/17/95 Mann 10.50 O 10.50 10/17/95 Gann 1.50 O 1.50 10/18/95 Mann 13.00 O 13.00 10/18/95 Haynes 4.25 O 4.25 10/18/95 Haynes 6.00 O 6.00 10/18/95 Gann 1.00 O 1.00 10/18/95 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 10/19/95 Mann 12.00 O 12.00 10/19/95 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 10/19/95 Nix 2.50 O 2.50 10/20/95 Mann 12.25 O 12.25 10/20/95 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 10/20/95 Haynes .50 O .50 10/20/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 10/21/95 Mann 13.75 O 13.75 10/21/95 Haynes 9.50 O 9.50 10/21/95 Gann 4.00 O 4.00 10/22/95 Mann 13.00 O 13.00 10/22/95 Haynes 9.00 O 9.00 10/22/95 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 10/22/95 Nix 3.00 O 3.00 10/23/95 Mann 9.00 O 9.00 10/23/95 Haynes 5.50 O 5.50 10/23/95 Haynes 3.50 O 3.50 10/23/95 Gann 4.00 O 4.00 10/24/95 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 10/24/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 10/24/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 10/24/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 10/24/95 Haynes 5.75 O 5.75 10/24/95 Haynes 2.75 O 2.75 10/24/75 Nix 2.00 O 2.00 10/25/95 Mann 11.50 O 11.50 10/25/95 Haynes 10.75 O 10.75 10/25/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 10/25/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 10/26/95 Mann 9.00 O 9.00 10/26/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 10/26/95 Haynes 2.00 O 2.00 10/26/95 Haynes 4.25 O 4.25 10/26/95 Gann 8.00 O 8.00 10/26/95 Nix 7.00 O 7.00 10/26/95 Nix 1.00 O 1.00 10/27/95 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 10/27/95 Mann 9.00 O 9.00 10/27/95 Gann 8.50 O 8.50 10/27/95 Nix 4.00 O 4.00 10/28/95 Haynes 16.00 O 16.00 10/28/95 Gann 10.00 O 10.00 10/28/95 Nix 3.00 O 3.00 10/28/95 Mann 16.00 O 16.00 10/29/95 Haynes 16.00 O 16.00 10/29/95 Gann 10.50 O 10.50 10/29/95 Nix 7.00 O 7.00 10/30/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 10/30/95 Mann 5.00 O 5.00 10/30/95 Haynes 5.00 O 5.00 10/30/95 Nix 8.00 O 8.00 10/31/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 10/31/95 Mann 6.00 O 6.00 10/31/95 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 10/31/95 Haynes 5.50 O 5.50 10/31/95 Gaun 14.00 O 14.00 10/31/95 Nix 4.00 O 4.00 11/01/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 11/01/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 11/01/95 Haynes 8.00 O 8.00 11/01/95 Nix 4.00 O 4.00 11/02/95 Mann 9.50 O 9.50 11/02/95 Nix 7.00 O 7.00 11/03/95 Mann 8.00 O 8.00 11/04/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 11/04/95 Haynes 2.25 O 2.25 11/05/95 Mann 2.50 O 2.50 11/05/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 11/06/95 Mann 3.00 O 3.00 11/06/95 Haynes 1.50 O 1.50 11/06/95 Haynes 3.00 O 3.00 11/07/95 Mann 1.00 O 1.00 11/07/95 Mann 2.50 O 2.50 11/07/95 Haynes 2.50 O 2.50 11/08/95 Mann .50 O .50 11/09/95 Nix 3.00 S 1.50 Inadequate Description Unrelated/Clerical 11/14/95 Haynes 4.00 O 4.00 11/16/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 11/16/95 Haynes 1.00 O 1.00 11/16/95 Haynes 3.50 S 0 Unrelated 11/17/95 Haynes .50 O .50 11/20/95 Haynes .75 O .75 11/21/95 Mann 4.75 O 4.75 11/23/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 11/24/95 Mann 4.00 O 4.00 11/25/95 Mann 8.00 S 0 Unrelated/Excessive Inadequate Description 11/26/95 Mann 2.00 S 0 Excessive 11/27/95 Mann 10.00 S 0 Unrelated/Excessive 11/28/95 Mann 8.00 S 0 Unrelated/Excessive
Attachment "B" FEES OF THE CLERK
Items Claimed Amount Disposition
Copies of pleadings $52.50 Disallowed Filing fee for cross-appeal $105.00 Disallowed
FEES FOR SERVICE OF SUMMONS COMPLAINT
Item Claimed Amount Disposition
Filing fee summons $120.00 Allowed complaint
FEES OF THE COURT REPORTER
Items Claimed Amount Disposition
Copy of trial transcript $891.00 Allowed Appearance at motion docket $125.00 Disallowed
FEES DISBURSEMENTS FOR PRINTING
Items Claimed Amount Disposition
Copy of video tape with $12.50 Allowed regard to tour of Tyson Food, Inc.'s plaint provided to Marvin Stewart
Copying of Dumas $156.00 Allowed Investigation File produced by Defendant during depositions
Items Claimed Total Amount Claimed Disposition
Evidentiary submission to $204.84 Disallowed support Motion to Compel Deposition Testimony of Max Dover
Binding (Kinko's) for $16.00 Disallowed Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Don Tyson's Deposition
Plaintiffs Evidentiary $418.82 Disallowed Submission in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment
Plaintiffs Objection to $46.34 Disallowed Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment
FEES FOR TRIAL WITNESSES
Items Claimed Total Amount Claimed Disposition
Attendance fees for all $2898.50 Allowed witnesses
FEES FOR EXEMPLIFICATION COPIES OF PAPERS NECESSARILY OBTAINED FOR USE IN CASE
Items Claimed Total Amount Claimed Disposition
Plaintiffs Proposed Rule 26 $2.40 Disallowed Disclosure
Plaintiffs First $6.40 Disallowed Interrogatories Request for Production
Plaintiffs Response to $2.40 Disallowed Defendant's Request for Production
Plaintiffs Second Request $1.60 Disallowed for Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Third Request for $2.40 Disallowed Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Motion to Compel $4.80 Disallowed Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Motion for $4.00 Disallowed Sanctions
Plaintiffs Motion for Video $2.40 Disallowed Inspection
Plaintiffs Fourth Request $1.60 Disallowed for Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Second $1.60 Disallowed Supplemental Rule 26 Disclosure
Plaintiffs Second Motion to $10.40 Disallowed Compel for Sanctions
Plaintiffs Rule 36(b) 5 6 $3.20 Disallowed Deposition Notice
Plaintiffs Deposition $6.80 Disallowed Subpoenas
Plaintiffs Supplemental $1.60 Disallowed Rule 26 Disclosure
Plaintiffs Fifth Request for $1.60 Disallowed Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Motion to Compel $7.20 Disallowed Bromlow's Answers to Interrogatories Request for Production of Documents
Plaintiff's Motion to Compel $3.20 Disallowed Deposition Testimony of Max Dover with Exhibit attached
Plaintiffs Motion for $7.20 Disallowed Sanctions with Exhibits attached
Plaintiffs Answers to $10.80 Disallowed Defendant's Interrogatories
Plaintiffs Response to $4.80 Disallowed Defendant's Motion for Order to Enjoin Misleading Harassing Communications
Plaintiffs Third Rule 26 $1.20 Disallowed Disclosure
Plaintiffs Fourth Rule 26 $1.20 Disallowed Disclosure
Plaintiffs Fifth Rule 26 $1.20 Disallowed Disclosure
Plaintiffs Motion to Compel $7.20 Disallowed the Deposition of Don Tyson
Plaintiffs Sixth Request for $3.20 Disallowed Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Motion to Compel $2.40 Disallowed Deposition of Jimmy Bromblow
Plaintiff's Objection to $3.20 Disallowed Defendant's Motion to Quash Deposition Notices to Wayne Stutts Gary Wayne Stutts
Plaintiffs Seventh Request $2.40 Disallowed for Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Response to $4.00 Disallowed Defendant's Motion for Protective Order Relative to Ongoing Investigationl Communication
Plaintiffs Response to $3.20 Disallowed Defendant's Motion for Protective Order to Enjoin Disclosure of Confidential Matters
Plaintiffs Motion to Compel $8.80 Disallowed Deposition Testimony of John Pittard
Plaintiffs Withdrawal of $4.20 Disallowed Second Supplemental Rule 26
Plaintiffs Seventh Rule 26 $5.40 Disallowed Disclosure
Plaintiffs Eighth Request $1.20 Disallowed for Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Response to $36.80 Disallowed Defendant's Motion to Disallow Motion to Strike
Proposed Pretrial Order $7.00 Allowed
Plaintiffs Motion to Compel $16.80 Disallowed Seventh Request for Production of Documents
Plaintiffs Objection to $22.40 Disallowed Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment
Plaintiffs Disclosure of $5.40 Disallowed Expert Witness
Plaintiffs Proposed Exhibit $20.00 Allowed List
Plaintiffs Witness List $10.40 Allowed
Plaintiffs Objections to $7.00 Allowed Exhibit Witness Lists
Plaintiffs Objections to $4.00 Allowed Defendant Bromblow's Exhibits
Plaintiffs Response in $12.00 Disallowed Partial Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Bar Expert Testimony
Plaintiffs Trial Subpoenas $15.60 Disallowed
Plaintiffs Response to $16.80 Disallowed Defendant's Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiffs Objections to $4.00 Disallowed Witness/Exhibit Lists re Dr. Beverly Thorn
Plaintiffs Supplemental $17.60 Disallowed Evidentiary Submission
Plaintiffs Motion in Limine $7.20 Disallowed
Plaintiffs Motion to Call $4.00 Disallowed Lead Adverse Witnesses
8.5 x 11 Specs 3 Hole $247.97 Allowed Punched Tabs 2 Sets of 100 Trial Notebooks with all exhibits
Enlarge/Mount Shacoh Bond $415.37 Allowed Prints/Dry Mounting Foamcore Trial Exhibits
141 30 x 42 Bond Blow-ups $1187.78 Allowed Trial Exhibits
15 color exhibits, laminated, $1171.58 Allowed Trial Exhibits; 1 set black white copies for exhibits; 3 black white exhibits 30 x 42, laminated
Voir Dire Questions $5.60 Allowed
Shacoh Bond prints, Trial $128.70 Allowed Exhibits
Holt Audio/Visual Video $286.20 Allowed
Drymounting 3 x 16" $50.40 Allowed Foamcore, Shacoh Bond Prints, Trial Exhibits
Oversize Aux. Mounting, $57.02 Allowed Trial Exhibit
Plaintiffs Objections to $6.40 Allowed Tyson's Jury Charges
Plaintiffs Objections to $2.40 Allowed Tyson's Special Interrogatories
Plaintiffs Proposed Special $5.60 Allowed Interrogatories
Plaintiffs Supplemental $8.00 Allowed Proposed Jury Instructions
Plaintiffs Proposed Jury $36.00 Allowed Instructions
Trial Exhibits and $550.00 $275.00 Allowed Deposition Exhibits
Plaintiffs Objection to $3.20 Disallowed Imposition of Statutory Cap
Plaintiffs Motion for Case $72.40 Allowed Expenses with attachments
Plaintiffs Interrogatories $2.40 Allowed Request for Production to Defendants' Counsel re billable time
Plaintiffs Response to $4.00 Allowed Tyson's Motion to Alter, Amend or Vacate Judgment with regard to Sherri Knight
Plaintiffs Objection to $6.40 Allowed Tyson's Motion for Judgment
Rule 45 Subpoena Fees to $90.00 Allowed Torbert Torbert and Gilker Jones with regard to Discovery on Attorney fees and expenses
Plaintiffs Motion to Hold $8.80 Disallowed Don Tyson in Contempt
Plaintiffs Motion to $9.60 Disallowed Conduct Discovery on Attorney Fee Issue Motion to Compel
Plaintiffs Response to $2.40 Disallowed Torbert's Objection to Subpoena
Plaintiff's Response to $2.40 Disallowed Tyson's Response to Preliminary Injunction
Plaintiffs Response to $2.40 Disallowed Tyson's Request to Investigate Contempt of Don Tyson
Plaintiffs Response to $11.20 Allowed Defendant's Interrogatories Request for Production of Documents
Alicia K. Haynes' Response $24.00 Allowed to Defendant's Subpoena
Larry R. Mann's Response $5.60 Allowed to Defendant's Subpoena
Plaintiffs Response to $4.00 Allowed Tyson's Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Engage in Discovery
COSTS INCIDENT TO TAKING DEPOSITIONS
Items Claimed Amount Disposition
All deposition $428.50 Allowed attendance/mileage fees for deponents who testified at trial
Deposition fees for all $11,045.55 Allowed deponents who testified at trial
OTHER COSTS
Items Claimed Amount DispositionExpert Witness Fee $4577.00 Disallowed
Mediation Fee $78.12 Allowed
Westlaw Research $155.43 Disallowed
Costs of Service of $3155.16 Allowed Subpoenas
U.S. Marshal Fee to Serve $70.60 Allowed Injunction on Tyson Foods, Inc.
Professional Services of $500.00 Allowed Mark McKnight, Esq.