Lewallen’s Attorney Seeking More Than $60,000 In Legal Fees

Knoxville, TN (2010-08-13) The Knoxville attorney that represented a former Scott County Sheriff’s Department K-9 Deputy in his Federal Labor Standards Act lawsuit against Scott County is seeking more than $60,000 in legal fees and cost associated with his case.

Andrienne L. Anderson, former Scott County K-9 Deputy Kristopher Lewallen’s Knoxville attorney, has filed a motion U.S. District Court in Knoxville seeking more than $60,000 in fees and costs associated with the officer’s case. Pursuant to U.S. District Judge Leon Jordan’s order on July 13, 2010, Anderson filed a two page motion in U.S. District Court in Knoxville on July 30, 2010 seeking $60,950 in legal fees and costs, including 200.9 billable hours for her services, along with another 8 hours for a paralegal that worked on the case. In addition to the motion, Anderson filed another 50-page affidavit associated with the motion, mostly supporting documentation for her fees claim.

In addition to her fees, Anderson also filed a request that Lewallen received another $1,856.20 in costs associated with the case, including court filing fees, mileage, service fees for witnesses who were served with subpoenas for depositions and/or trial, court reporter fees for depositions and the trial manuscripts, and copying costs.

Both requests were filed for services and expenses through July 22, 2010, and were subject to change with the pending motion for reconsideration on file with the court.

Two days prior to the filing of the motion to collect attorney fees and cost, Anderson filed a writ of garnishment against the County, petitioning the court to order a local bank to encumber county funds to satisfy the Lewallen judgment, $44, 439.96 plus interest.

On August 3, 2010, Arthur F. Knight, III, the lawyer hired by the County’s insurance company to represent its interest in the case, filed a motion to quash the writ.

Since the writ of garnishment was filed, the local bank has responded, indicating the funds have been encumbered. If those funds are immediately dispersed to Lewallen, Anderson has requested the money be placed on deposit with the Clerk of the Court until the County’s motion to alter or amend the judgment has been ruled on.

Meanwhile, the County has petitioned the Court for a Stay of Execution on the Lewallen judgment pending the court’s decision on its motion for reconsideration. Subsequently, Anderson filed a motion in opposition, citing the lack of proof the County would pay the judgment in a timely manner. In her motion, Anderson wrote, “Prior to the trial, defendant’s (Scott County) counsel made clear it would a long time before Deputy Lewallen would be able to collect any judgment he obtain, and Scott County Commissioners have made public comments about ‘getting blood from a turnip’,” she added.

The County has until August 30, 2010 to file its response to Anderson’s motion for fees and costs.