Caston v. Butler

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOEL CASTON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 08-1656 (JDB)
JAMES BUTLER, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In its June 26, 2009 Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court denied defendant’s
motion for summary judgment without prejudice. Caston v. Butler, 629 F. Supp. 2d 20, 23
(D.D.C. 2009). On July 23, 2009, plaintiff filed a “Memorandum in Traverse & Cross Motion
Seeking Summary Judgment,” through which he demands “judgment in his favor on all claims
filed against . . . defendant[,] . . . a declaratory judgment, i.e., a refund of the $5,000.00 retainer
fee, compensatory damages of $5,000.00, and punitive damages of [$]150,000.00[,] [o]r . . relief
by whatever means [the Court] deam’s [sic] necessary.” Id. Defendant has not filed an
opposition.
The parties do not dispute that defendant Butler’s law firm received a retainer of
$5,000.00 on August 7, 2006, to represent plaintiff in a post-conviction matter. See Compl. ¶ 3
& Ex. 2; Def.’s Mot. for Summ. J. at 2 & Attach (Butler Aff.) ¶ 2. Plaintiff avers that Butler
failed to provide legal services and that he demanded the return of his files and the retainer. See
Compl. ¶¶ 10-13. Although plaintiff’s mother was able to retrieve the files, Butler has not
-1-
refunded the retainer. See id. ¶¶ 14-16; Pl.’s Mem. in Resp. to Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss for Failure
to State a Claim [#25] ¶ 7.
Under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[t]he judgment sought should be
rendered if the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits show
that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment
as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(2). “If the opposing party does not respond, summary
judgment should, if appropriate, be entered against that party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)(2).
Plaintiff establishes that there is no genuine issue of material fact as to his payment to
Butler of a $5,000.00 retainer fee, his demand for a refund, and Butler’s failure to refund the
retainer. Butler has not submitted his own affidavits, declarations or documentary evidence to
the contrary. The Court will grant plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in part, and will
enter judgment against Butler and in plaintiff’s favor for $5,000.00. However, because the
record lacks evidence to support plaintiff’s demands for compensatory and punitive damages, the
motion will be denied in part as well.
An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/
JOHN D. BATES
DATE: December 4, 2009 United States District Judge
-2-