Precision Sampling Incorporated v. EA Engineering, Science and Technology Incorporated

Filing 42

ORDER granting 37 defendant's Motion for Attorney Fees and non-taxable costs in the total amount of $15,644.69. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J Martone on 10/8/13.(LSP)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
EA Engineering, Science and Technology,)
)
Inc.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
Precision Sampling, Inc.,

No. CV-12-02228-PHX-FJM
ORDER

16
17
Before the court is defendant EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc.’s motion
18
for an award of attorney’s fees and non-taxable costs (doc. 37) and memorandum in support
19
(doc. 41). Plaintiff did not file a response and the time for doing so has expired. See LRCiv.
20
54.2(b)(3).
21
Plaintiff’s motion for an award of attorney’s fees is based on A.R.S. § 12-341.01,
22
which authorizes a court to award fees in “any contested action arising out of a contract.”
23
It is clear that this action arose out of the parties’ Subcontractor Service Order Agreement
24
dated April 16, 2012, and that defendant is the prevailing party. In deciding a motion for an
25
award of fees, we consider the factors outlined in Associated Indem. Corp. v. Warner, 143
26
Ariz. 567, 570, 694 P.2d 1181, 1184 (1985), including (1) the merits of the unsuccessful
27
party’s claim, (2) whether the litigation could have been avoided or settled, (3) whether
28

1

assessing fees would cause an extreme hardship, (4) the extent of the prevailing party’s

2

success, (5) whether the legal question presented was novel, and (6) whether an award of fees

3

would discourage litigation of meritorious claims.

4

Each of these factors weighs in favor of an award of fees. Plaintiff’s claim was

5

without merit. There is no indication that the litigation could have been avoided or that an

6

award would cause extreme hardship. Defendant prevailed on all relief sought. The legal

7

question was not novel and there is no showing that an award of fees would inhibit litigation

8

of meritorious claims. Therefore, we conclude that defendant is entitled to recover its

9

reasonable fees and costs.

10

Defendant seeks an award of fees and costs totaling $15,644.69. Its hourly rates for

11

partners are between $200 and $230, and for paralegals $90. These rates are comparable to

12

the prevailing rates in Phoenix, Arizona and are therefore reasonable. Defendant seeks fees

13

for a total of 72.8 hours, which we also consider reasonable under the circumstances in this

14

case. Finally, defendant’s request for reimbursement of its non-taxable costs in the amount

15

of $979.69 is also reasonable.

16
17
18

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED GRANTING defendant’s motion for award of
attorney’s fees and non-taxable costs in the total amount of $15,644.69 (doc. 37).
DATED this 8th day of October, 2013.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-