HALES v. PRESTON et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE DIVISION
JEREMY B. HALES,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No.: 1:25-cv-58-RH-ZCB
RICHARD LUTHMANN, et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________/
ORDER
Presently 	before 	the 	Court 	are 	Defendant 	Helm’s 	motion 	for
attorney’s fees (Doc. 218) and Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for extension
of time to respond to the motion for attorney’s fees (Doc. 219). 	As
explained below, this order grants the motion for extension of time and
requires Defendant Helm to supplement his motion for attorney’s fees.
Under 	Local 	Rule 	54.1, 	a 	motion 	for 	attorney’s 	fees 	must 	be
accompanied by billing records and declarations sufficient to allow the
Court to evaluate the reasonableness of the sought amount. 	See N.D.
Fla. Loc. R. 54.1(C)-(E). 	Defendant Helm’s motion for attorney’s fees
references “billing records” or “entries” being filed with the motion. (Doc.
218 at 2, 17-18, 20-21, 36-37). 	But aside from listing counsel’s hourly
Case 1:25-cv-00058-RH-ZCB Document 220 Filed 06/29/26 Page 1 of 3

2
rate, the number of hours worked, and two entries that should be cut
according to Defendant Helm’s expert (id. at 4-5, 16-21), the Court is
unable to locate any detailed billing records included with the motion.
Thus, the Court will require Defendant Helm to supplement his motion
with detailed billing records, as required by the Local Rules. 	See N.D.
Fla. Loc. R. 54.1(C)-(D), (E)(1) (requiring movants to file a “declaration
setting out the time devoted to the case by date and task, specifically
identifying the timekeeper and the timekeeper’s claimed hourly rate” and
which 	includes 	“sufficient 	detail 	to 	allow 	a 	determination 	of
reasonableness”).
As to Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for extension of time (Doc. 219),
the Court will grant the requested extension for good cause shown.
Because Defendant Helm must supplement his motion for attorney’s fees,
the 	Court 	will 	add 	a 	commensurate 	amount 	of 	time 	to 	Plaintiff’s
requested extension of August 9, 2026.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
1. 	On 	or 	before 	July 	3, 	2026, 	Defendant 	Helm 	must
supplement his motion for attorney’s fees (Doc. 218) with detailed billing
Case 1:25-cv-00058-RH-ZCB Document 220 Filed 06/29/26 Page 2 of 3

3
records sufficient to allow the Court to assess the reasonableness of the
requested amount. 	See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 54.1(C)-(E).
2. 	Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for extension of time (Doc. 219)
is GRANTED to the extent that Plaintiff’s response to Defendant Helm’s
motion for attorney’s fees (Doc. 218) is due on or before August 14,
2026.
DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of June 2026.
s/
Zachary C. Bolitho
Zachary C. Bolitho
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 1:25-cv-00058-RH-ZCB Document 220 Filed 06/29/26 Page 3 of 3