51 results for 'cat:"Sanctions" AND cat:"Attorney Fees"'.
J. Holmes grants in part this motion for attorney fees filed in connection with a motion to compel discovery. The court will award $8,000 in attorney fees as a discovery sanction, as the defendant company's nondisclosure was not "substantially justified."
Court: USDC Middle District of Tennessee , Judge: Holmes, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv1103, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: sanctions, Discovery, attorney Fees
J. Grant finds that the district court properly awarded the store $62,000 in attorney fees as sanctions in an action against the shopping center owner arising after the store's request to exercise its option to extend the terms of its lease was denied. The owner acted in bad faith since it had knowledge of the lack of diversity jurisdiction in the case but delayed disclosing the information for more than a year. The sanction award was limited to two-thirds of the attorney fees incurred by the store after the owner discovered its diversity-destroying citizenship. The district court correctly struck the store's affidavit claiming its attorney did not act in bad faith as untimely and irrelevant. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Grant, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: 22-12461, Categories: sanctions, attorney Fees
J. Holmes partially grants the individual plaintiff's motion for attorney fees in connection with his motion to compel discovery. The court previously ordered the defendant company to produce certain documents and "to make a corporate representative available" to provide testimony on certain topics. The defendant company now argues that there was a conflict regarding its duties under Italian data privacy laws, but the court concludes that its failure to provide certain documents was not "substantially justified." Not all of the requested fees are reasonable, however, as a discovery sanction.
Court: USDC Middle District of Tennessee , Judge: Holmes, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv1103, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: sanctions, Discovery, attorney Fees
J. Cain denies an insurer's request for sanctions of attorney fees against a lawyer and his law firm for suing the insurer after the insurer had settled a property owner’s hurricane damage claim with other counsel. The lawyer and his firm acted in bad faith throughout the litigation and sanctions are appropriate. However, because the proof of billing hours submitted by insurance counsel are inadequate, insurance counsel are allowed time to support the reasonableness of the fees sought.
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Cain, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv3375, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: sanctions, attorney Fees
J. Kennelly partially grants account executive employees’ motion for sanctions against their employer, a logistics firm. The employees accused the firm of wrongly denying them overtime pay, and in subsequent proceedings a magistrate judge found the firm had violated its discovery obligations. This court affirms some of the objections the firm had raised to the magistrate judge’s sanction recommendations, but overrules others. The court also orders the firm to pay the employees almost $88,000 in attorney fees.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Kennelly, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 1:16cv7331, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: sanctions, attorney Fees, Class Action
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Horan finds that a health care management company’s failure to produce court ordered documents in an underlying trademark case brought by a group of hospital emergency rooms is not excusable just because the company says it faced technical difficulties retrieving the documents. The limited number of documents that the company failed to produce are of specific and central importance to the case suggesting an attempt to evade the court’s order to produce. The court grants sanction measures requested by the emergency rooms.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Horan, Filed On: April 8, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv891, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, Trademark, attorney Fees
J. Sessions sustained and overruled, in part, an industrial acquisition and a bakery investment companies’ objection to fees and costs submissions brought by a class of workers’ regarding labor law violations. The attorneys sought higher than normal hourly fees and number of hours typically approved by the court and the fees shall be reduced. The parties’ statements are very vague for the fees and cost but shall submit a more in-depth revised statement within 30 days.
Court: USDC Vermont, Judge: Sessions, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv120, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: sanctions, attorney Fees, Labor
J. Lanza partly grants a former U.S. Human Rights Network executive director's motion for attorney's fees following her termination. The executive director sufficiently showed in court that the network may have misclassified her role as an independent contractor, but failed to show that she was entitled to sanctions to stop her employer's representation from publicly smearing her name.
Court: USDC Arizona, Judge: Lanza, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv757, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: Employment, sanctions, attorney Fees
J. Hurson adopts in part a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to grant sanctions in favor of the J. Noble Group, but orders a default judgment in this conversion dispute alleging the construction company and its corporate representative converted funds. The company and corporate representative must reimburse cost in the amount of $250 and attorney fees in the amount of $17,808 to J. Noble Group. The attorney for the construction company motioned to withdraw as counsel and it is granted.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Hurson, Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv1618, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: sanctions, Conversion, attorney Fees
J. Kenney grants a company’s renewed motion to assess defense fees and costs in this product liability case wherein a customer alleges its rolling walker device collapsed underneath her while she was exiting a subway car, causing her injuries. The rolling walker’s manufacturer, a third party, must pay for defense fees and costs incurred in this matter and the settlement amount since it refused to comply with court orders in this case.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Kenney, Filed On: December 29, 2023, Case #: 2:19cv268, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: sanctions, Product Liability, attorney Fees
J. Weissmann finds that the trial court properly ruled in a zoning dispute over a shooting range because the property owners had been granted a permit to sell guns but not to have a shooting range on the property, and the owners failed to defend the zoning violation other than insisting county officials had not been allowed to enter the property. Meanwhile, attorney fees and sanctions were properly entered. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Court Of Appeals, Judge: Weissmann, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 23A-CT-467, Categories: sanctions, Zoning, attorney Fees
J. Lasnik grants the mortgage lender's motion for rule 11 sanctions against Scott Stafne, attorney for the lendee, arguing that the lendee's claims were all frivolous and that his challenges to the 2021 non-judicial foreclosure sale and subsequent surplus funds proceeding were improperly asserted. Stafne made no attempt to prove his client's claims despite refusing to withdraw the challenged pleading or otherwise attempted to justify their failures by raising meritless challenges to the tribunal. Stafne is liable for $15,300 in attorney fees.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Lasnik, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv223, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: Fraud, sanctions, attorney Fees
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Ohio finds the jurisdictional question posed by the attorneys of the wife in a divorce case is frivolous in nature. The same attorneys have petitioned this court regarding the same question multiple times and, therefore, they will be sanctioned and declared vexatious litigators. Additionally, the husband will be awarded any attorney fees incurred as a result of this appeal.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-4185, Categories: sanctions, attorney Fees
J. Gershon orders the operator of an online eyewear marketplace to pay a contact lens manufacturer $227,065 in attorney fees and costs after receiving sanctions in a trademark infringement lawsuit. The court finds the manufacturer’s initial request of $1.1 million in fees to be excessive, deficient and in some cases vague and applies a substantial reduction in both counsels’ hourly rates and hours worked.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Gershon, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 1:18cv407, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, attorney Fees
J. Lasnik grants the mortgage lender's motion for attorney fees and sanctions against the homeowner and his counsel, who brought a lawsuit alleging that the mortgage lender and others wrongfully conducted a 2021 non-judicial foreclosure sale and used the subsequent surplus funds for improper purposes. Because the homeowner and his counsel did not show that something went wrong during the foreclosure that would make judicial remedies available and made no attempt to prove the homeowner's claims, they are jointly and severally liable for $15,300 in reasonable attorney fees.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Lasnik, Filed On: November 8, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv223, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: sanctions, Foreclosure, attorney Fees
J. Barker grants, in part, the ash processing company's motion for sanctions against the mineral recovery machine manufacturer, ruling the inspector's photos and statements about the processing company's filtration system violated the parties' protective order. They were used on the manufacturer's patent application for a similar product and not solely for discovery, as required by the order. Therefore, the manufacturer will be enjoined from introducing the patent during this case while the ash processing company is awarded fees associated with this motion.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Barker, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv662, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Patent, sanctions, attorney Fees
Per curiam, the circuit finds that the district court properly imposed sanctions in upholding a settlement concerning attorney fees since the order of settlement specified the fee amount, and the argument that attorney incompetence invalidated the agreement constituted a collateral attack on the judgment. In light of other frivolous actions on the record, future appeals or filings relating to the case cannot be brought without obtaining leave of the court. Affirmed.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 21-2961-cv, Categories: sanctions, Settlements, attorney Fees
J. Wormuth recommends granting the logistics company's motion for default judgment against the trucking company, ruling the trucking company's willful refusal to appear for a deposition after a court order prejudiced the logistics company and requires judgment in its favor on the spoliation crossclaim. The logistics company is also entitled to attorney fees for all losses related to the trucking company's failure to comply with discovery orders, as well as any work performed in relation to the current motion.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Wormuth, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv986, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: sanctions, Discovery, attorney Fees
J. Bowman grants, in part, the cleaning company's motion for sanctions, ruling the former employee's repeated refusals to comply with court orders regarding discovery has prejudiced the company and prevented it from preparing any type of defense to counterclaims filed by the employee. Therefore, the employee is ordered to appear at a telephonic conference on November 13 or face additional sanctions, while the company will also be awarded more than $10,000 in attorney fees.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Bowman, Filed On: October 26, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv12, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, Trade Secrets, attorney Fees
J. Estudillo grants the family's counsel $39,800 in attorney fees for their complaint that the prison healthcare services' negligent practices concerning suicide prevention led to the death of the inmate. The family's counsel is entitled to fees regarding research of the deleted video, deposition and discovery prep, and for time spent drafting a notice of deposition. The family's counsel had to spend time on this because of Kitsap County's spoliation of the video evidence.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Estudillo, Filed On: October 17, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv5800, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: sanctions, Discovery, attorney Fees
J. Poplin grants in part the resort plaintiffs' motions for sanctions in their lawsuit against a company that allegedly "disrupts valid contracts between timeshare developers and their customers." Attorney fees are appropriate as to the plaintiffs' second motion for sanctions, though no sanctions are warranted with respect to the first motion. Additionally, the parties should meet and confer to resolve the amount of the fees due.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Tennessee , Judge: Poplin, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 3:20cv251, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: sanctions, Consumer Law, attorney Fees
J. Stratton finds that the trial court's sanction of $70,000 in attorney fees and costs was supported by substantial evidence that the husband in a dissolution action demonstrated a "steadfast, continued disregard of the court's orders and the terms of the parties' settlement agreement and judgment." Also, the sanctions order of $1,000 per day was not indefinite as he argued, but contingent solely on his compliance. And he failed to show the sanctions are an unreasonable burden. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Stratton, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: B313786, Categories: Family Law, sanctions, attorney Fees
J. Ritter grants the school district's motion for sanctions, ruling the anonymous individual who filed the second lawsuit regarding sexual assault clearly violated the protective order in the initial case filed by the first anonymous individual because the complaint included confidential information and school records found only through discovery in the initial case. Although dismissal of the complaint is not warranted, attorney fees and costs will be granted to the school district once they provide estimates for work performed on issues relevant to the sanctions and violations of the confidentiality order.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Ritter, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 1:20cv1041, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: sanctions, attorney Fees
J. Haines awards Kids 2 more than $19,000 in sanctions based on testimony that plaintiffs' attorney "made countless improper objections, including repeatedly coaching his witnesses and testifying himself, and instructed his witnesses not to answer on more than two dozen instances" during the deposition phase of a wrongful death action.
Court: USDC Western District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Haines, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv166, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: sanctions, Wrongful Death, attorney Fees