William Wade Waller Company v. Nexstar Broadcasting Inc et al
ORDER denying deft RK Collections' 48 Motion for Attorney's Fees. Signed by Judge G. Thomas Eisele on 8/15/11. (vjt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WILLIAM WADE WALLER CO., d/b/a
NO. 4-10-CV-00764 GTE
NEXSTAR BROADCASTING, INC.,
d/b/a KARK TELEVISION, and
RK COLLECTIONS, INC.
Before the Court is a motion for attorney’s fees filed by Defendant RK Collections (“RKC”).
Plaintiff William Wade Waller Co. (“Waller”) has filed a response opposing the motion.
The Court declines to exercise its discretion to award attorney’s fees in this case. See 17 U.S.C.
§ 505 (providing courts with the discretion to award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party).
“In exercising its discretion under 17 U.S.C. § 505, a court should consider factors such as
frivolousness, motivation, objective unreasonableness (both in the factual and legal components of the
case) and the need in particular circumstances to advance considerations of compensation and
deterrence.” Silberstein v. Digital Art Solutions, Inc., 2003 WL 21297291, *2 (S.D. N.Y. 2003)
(omitting internal quotations and citation).
This was not, as RKC asserts, a case with no factual basis. Although Waller was unable to prove
damages, there is no question that Waller’s photographs were used for RKC’s benefit.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT the motion for attorney’s fees (docket no. 48) filed by
Defendant RK Collections be, and it is hereby, DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 15th day of August, 2011.
_/s/Garnett Thomas Eisele___________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?