Weber, et al v. TMG Logistics Inc., et al

Filing 206

ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 10/9/2018 DENYING 185 Motion for Attorney Fees (Washington, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13

----oo0oo---STACY L. WEBER and TIMOTHY
J. WEBER,
Plaintiffs,

14
15
16
17

NO. 2:15-CV-01829 WBS

v.
TMG LOGISTICS, INC., and
DAVINDER SINGH MINHAS,

ORDER RE: MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’
FEES AND COSTS

Defendants.

18
19
20
21

----oo0oo---Before the court is defendants’ Motion for Attorneys’

22

Fees and Costs filed August 9, 2018.

23

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(2), a court may award

24

reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, where “a party

25

fails to admit what is requested” under a request for admission

26

“if the requesting party later proves . . . the matter true.”

27

The court must award such expenses unless (1) the request was

28

properly objected to, (2) “the admission sought was of no
1

(Docket No. 185.)

Under

1

substantial importance,” (3) “the party failing to admit had a

2

reasonable ground to believe that it might prevail on the

3

matter,” or (4), “there was other good reason for the failure to

4

admit.”

5

party reasonably believed it might prevail for purposes of Rule

6

37(c)(2), the true test is ‘not whether [the] party prevailed at

7

trial but rather whether [it] acted reasonably in believing that

8

[it] might prevail.’”

9

cv-02027-MCE-DAD, 2014 WL 3867426, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2014)

10
11

Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(2).

“In determining whether a

Paradise Nw., Inc. v. Randhawa, No. 2:09-

(citation omitted).
Defendants claim that they are entitled to attorney’s

12

fees and expenses under Rule 37(c)(2) based on plaintiff’s

13

failure to admit that she did not sustain lost wages or loss of

14

earning capacity.

15

tended to show that plaintiff did not in fact sustain lost wages

16

or loss of earning capacity as a result of the accident, as found

17

by the jury.

18

tending to show that she would or could have earned more had she

19

not suffered the alleged injuries she claims were caused by the

20

accident at issue in this case.

21

that while her family’s income may not have decreased in the

22

years after the accident, it would have increased more had she

23

been able to continue with her real estate investing work fully

24

as she had before the accident, or if she was not precluded from

25

doing other work in the future she may have otherwise been

26

qualified to perform.

27
28

The court agrees that the evidence at trial

Nevertheless, plaintiff did produce some evidence

In essence, plaintiff argued

The court notes that the determination of whether
plaintiff suffered lost income or loss of earning capacity hinged
2

1

in part on the jury’s credibility determination as to plaintiff

2

and plaintiff’s witnesses, who testified that she was unable to

3

continue her prior real estate work after the accident due to her

4

physical and mental condition.

5

of income and loss of earning capacity claims with expert

6

testimony.

7

while ultimately not persuasive, was a sufficient basis for a

8

reasonable belief that she would prevail at trial on her lost

9

wages and loss of earning capacity claims.1

Plaintiff also supported her loss

Under these circumstances, plaintiff’s evidence,

Accordingly, the

10

court will deny defendants’ request for attorney’s fees and

11

expenses.

12

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants’ Motion for

13

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (Docket No. 185) be, and the same

14

hereby is, DENIED.

15

Dated:

October 9, 2018

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Moreover, even assuming that plaintiff did not have a
reasonable basis for her lost wages and loss of earning capacity
claims, several of the claimed fees and expenses do not appear to
be incurred solely as a result of defending these claims. (See,
e.g., Mot. Ex. J at 20-22 (billing entries for trial time related
to Stacy and Timothy Weber).)
3
1