Swanson v. Martins
232 F. Supp. 3d 23
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- Plaintiffs Christopher Swanson and Jeff Printz contracted to sell property in D.C. to Marina Martins for $6,500,000; contract required 3% earnest money ($195,000) and allowed forfeiture as liquidated damages on purchaser default.
- Parties executed a February 5, 2015 addendum making the 3% earnest money a non‑refundable fee if buyer failed to close by March 25, 2015.
- Martins failed to pay the earnest money and failed to close by the deadline; plaintiffs sued for breach of contract on October 6, 2015.
- Martins was served but did not appear or answer; the Clerk entered default and plaintiffs moved for default judgment seeking $195,000 (liquidated damages), $14,405 attorneys’ fees, and $400 costs.
- Court deemed plaintiffs’ allegations admitted, found contract and addendum valid, and awarded $195,000 damages plus $400 filing costs; court deferred ruling on attorneys’ fees pending additional evidence on prevailing market rates.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liability for breach of contract | Martins breached contract and addendum by failing to pay earnest money and close | No responsive argument (default) | Liability established by admitted allegations; default judgment entered for plaintiff |
| Liquidated damages amount | Contract/agreement sets liquidated damages at 3% of $6,500,000 = $195,000 | No response (default) | Court awarded $195,000 as liquidated damages |
| Recoverability of costs (filing fee) | Plaintiffs seek $400 filing fee per contract entitlement to legal expenses | No response | Court awarded $400 filing fee as reasonable cost |
| Attorneys' fees: reasonableness of rates/hours | Plaintiffs seek ~$14,805; submitted time records and counsel declarations supporting hours and rates | No response; court must assess if rates align with community prevailing rates | Court found hours reasonable but deferred ruling on fee rates; ordered plaintiffs to submit additional market‑rate evidence before awarding fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. Ergo Solutions, LLC, 4 F. Supp. 3d 171 (D.D.C.) (defaulted complaint allegations deemed admitted)
- Int’l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Fund v. Auxier Drywall, LLC, 531 F. Supp. 2d 56 (D.D.C.) (default judgment procedures and damages determination)
- Ventura v. L.A. Howard Const. Co., 134 F. Supp. 3d 99 (D.D.C.) (court may rely on detailed affidavits/documentary evidence for damages; caution on Laffey matrix use)
- Eley v. District of Columbia, 793 F.3d 97 (D.C. Cir.) (district court may not rely on Laffey matrix without additional evidence that rates reflect prevailing community rates)
- Covington v. District of Columbia, 57 F.3d 1101 (D.C. Cir.) (evidence needed to show requested attorney rates are in line with community rates)
- Coon v. Wood, 68 F. Supp. 3d 77 (D.D.C.) (elements of a breach of contract claim)
- Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 (U.S.) ("attorney's usual billing rate" standard for reasonable fees)
- Richlin Sec. Serv. Co. v. Chertoff, 553 U.S. 571 (U.S.) (attorney's fees can include paralegal fees)