No Value: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF THE CWABS, INC., ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-26 vs. SHEPPARD, ELSIE A

• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR CHARLOTTE
COUNTY, FLORIDA. CIVIL DIVISION
                                                                                               2
CASE NO. 082011CA003707XXXXXX
                                                                                               =i
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THE
BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE
CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWALT, INC.,
ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2007-OH1,
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES,
SERIES 2007-OH1,

        Plaintiff,
vs.


ELISE A. SHEPPARD; DONALD L. SHEPPARD;
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. AS SUCCESSOR TO
WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.; UNKNOWN TENANT NO.
1; UNKNOWN TENANT NO. 2; and ALL UNKNOWN
PARTIES CLAIMING INTERESTS BY, THROUGH,
UNDER OR AGAINST A NAMED DEFENDANT TO
THIS ACTION, OR HAVING OR CLAIMING TO HAVE
ANY RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST IN THE
PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED,

        Defendants.
                                                          /

                                     AFFIDAVIT OF ATTORNEYS' FEES

STATE OF FLORIDA                     )
                                     )ss.
COUNTY OF BROWARD                    )
                     I, John A. Watson, the undersigned, do hereby state on oath as follows:
                     Iam an attorney at law licensed to practice in Florida, and have been admitted to the
practice of law in the State of Florida since May 13, 1982.
                     Iam personally familiar with the procedure of mortgage foreclosures in Florida, and with
the fees usually charged by attorneys in conducting si~b suits.
                     Iam personally familiar with the law firm of Smith, Hiatt & Diaz, P.A. and how the Firm
processes foreclosure files. I am further familiar with the fee agreement the Firm has with its clients
regarding foreclosure files.
                     Tam familiar with Rule 4-1.5(b) of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, and have taken
into account the factors set forth in such Rule for the determination of reasonable attorneys fees.
                     Tam familiar with and have considered the dictates of the Florida Supreme Court in the
case of Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (1985) for the determination of
reasonable attorneys fees.
In arriving at my opinion of the value of reasonable attorneys fees in this matter I have
considered the following criteria:
                   a.      The time and labor required, the novelty, complexity and difficulty of the
                           questions involved, and the skill requisite to perform the legal services properly.
                           The likelihood that acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other
                           employment for the lawyer.
                           The fee or rate of fee customarily charged in the locality for services of a
                           comparable or similar nature, including the aspect of discounted fees.
                           The amount involved and the result to be obtained.
                           The time limitations imposed by the client or the circumstances.
                           The nature and length of professional relationship with the client.
                           The experience, reputation and ability of the lawyers performing the services.
                           Whether the fee is fixed or contingent.


                   Smith, Hiatt & Diaz, P.A. has reached a fee agreement with their client wherein the Firm
is paid based on a flat fee for uncontested foreclosures, such as this matter. The Firm is paid a flat fee of
$1,300.00 for an uncontested foreclosure. To the extent an issue is raised which fails to raise a genuine
issue of fact, but must be replied to, the Firm is paid on a flat fee basis for a response to the issue. The
Firm does not maintain specific time records for uncontested foreclosures pursuant to it’s flat fee
arrangement, therefore I have not reviewed specific time records.
                   I am familiar with the specific steps and requirements that the Firm must complete to
handle an uncontested foreclosure to its conclusion. This knowledge, together with my understanding of
the flat fee agreement, leads me to the opinion that a flat fee of $2,300.00 is reasonable. In my opinion
reviewing the actual file in this case is not necessary and would be futile, therefore I have not reviewed
the actual file.


                   THIS CONCLUDES THIS AFFIDAVIT Be                                        YD

                                                             John A. Watson

 Sworn to and subscribed before me            ay
 of,            , 2012                              ~
‘personally known to me and who did take an oath. -
                                                                                       4
Ze
Notary Public                                                          tS
My commission expires:

1183-112197