Saint Alphonsus Medical Center - Nampa et al v St Luke's Health System Ltd

Filing 690

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER re 668 MOTION for Relief [Contested] from Judgment Based on Clerical Mistakes, Or in the Alternative, for Reconsideration or Clarification and 667 MOTION for Relief from Judgment Based on Clerical Mistake. In the briefing, the parties agree that St. Al's attorney fee award should be reduced. St. Luke's seeks a reduction in the sum of $588.30, but as St. Al's correctly points out, the reduction is more accurately pegged at $3 68. The Court will therefore reduce St. Al's attorney fee sum by this amount to arrive at a new fee award of $7,061,182.07. The Court will enter a separate amended Judgment to reflect these changes. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
IN THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
SAINT ALPHONSUS MEDICAL CENTER NAMPA, INC., TREASURE VALLEY
HOSPITAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
Case No. 1:12-CV-00560-BLW (Lead
SAINT ALPHONSUS HEALTH SYSTEM,
Case)
INC., AND SAINT ALPHONSUS
REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, INC.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiffs,
v.
ST. LUKE’S HEALTH SYSTEM, LTD.
Defendant.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION; STATE
OF IDAHO

Case No. 1:13-CV-00116-BLW

Plaintiffs,
v.
ST. LUKE’S HEALTH SYSTEM, LTD.;
SALTZER MEDICAL GROUP, P.A.
Defendants.

INTRODUCTION
The Court has before it two motions for relief from judgment based on a clerical
mistake filed by St. Al’s and the State of Idaho. The motions are fully briefed and at
issue. There is no objection to the State’s motion and so the Court will grant it and
increase the State’s attorney fee award to $972,993.50. St. Al’s motion is contested. For
the reasons described below, the Court will grant St. Al’s motion in part, awarding
$101,361.97 in additional costs to St. Al’s, and reducing its attorney fee award by $368.
Memorandum Decision – page 1

ANALYSIS
The motion filed by St. Al’s seeks to correct a clerical error in the Court’s earlier
Judgment awarding attorney fees and costs. In that decision, the Court granted St. Al’s
request for costs in the sum of $85,333.98, but did not consider a supplemental cost
petition seeking an additional $112,624.41 in costs. In its pending motion, St. Al’s asks
the Court to correct its clerical error, consider the supplemental request for costs, and
increase the total cost award to $197,958.39.
In support of that motion, St. Al’s alleges that the costs sought in its supplemental
request were all incurred in complying with the ESI Order issued in this case. More
specifically, these costs were incurred in creating the TIFF images, OCR text files, and
bates numbering required to produce and examine documents in compliance with the ESI
Order. St. Luke’s does not dispute that assertion. Such costs are taxable under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1920(4). See In re Online DVD-Rental Litigation, 779 F.3d 914, 926 (9th Cir. 2015).
St. Luke’s does, however, make a persuasive argument that the supplemental costs
should be reduced by 10%. In its earlier decision evaluating St. Al’s attorney fee
petition, the Court concluded that
10% of the hours were devoted to pursuing vertical issues unrelated to the
successful claims. This represents the time spent by the private parties
pursuing the anticompetitive effects in the markets for pediatric services in
Nampa, inpatient hospital services in Ada and Canyon counties, and two
outpatient hospital services markets in Ada and Canyon counties. While
some of the time spent on these vertical issues overlapped with successful
issues and is compensable, as discussed above, the Court finds that 10% of
that time did not overlap and is not compensable. The Court shall therefore
reduce the fees sought by counsel for the private parties by 10%.

Memorandum Decision – page 2

See Memorandum Decision (Dkt. No. 665) at pp. 6-7. The same analysis applies to the
supplemental cost bill because these particular costs were all incurred in electronic
discovery, some of which was engaged in the pursuit of unsuccessful claims. It is fair to
assume that 10% of that discovery was devoted to pursuing vertical issues unrelated to
successful claims, just as 10% of the attorneys’ time was devoted to that pursuit.
Consequently, the Court will reduce the supplemental award by 10% from $112,624.41
to $101,361.97. When added to the earlier cost award of $85,333.98, the revised total
cost award is $186,695.95. The Court will amend the Judgment to add this sum to St.
Al’s award.
In the briefing, the parties agree that St. Al’s attorney fee award should be
reduced. St. Luke’s seeks a reduction in the sum of $588.30, but as St. Al’s correctly
points out, the reduction is more accurately pegged at $368. The Court will therefore
reduce St. Al’s attorney fee sum by this amount to arrive at a new fee award of
$7,061,182.07. The Court will enter a separate amended Judgment to reflect these
changes.

DATED: November 29, 2016

_________________________
B. Lynn Winmill
Chief Judge
United States District Court

Memorandum Decision – page 3