Teamsters Local Union No. 639 v. Transdev Services, Inc.

Filing 38

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Peter J. Messitte on 2/7/2024. (bas, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO.639,

* *

Plaintiff,

*

V.

*

Civil Action No.23-780-PJM

TRANSDEV SERVICES,INC.
*

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Teamsters Local UnioaNo^^P (the "Union") has filed a Motion for Attorney's Fees and
accompanying documentation in compliance with the Court's Local Rule 109.2 and Appendix B to
the Rules(ECF No. 33). Transdev has filed a response in opposition (ECF Nos. 34, 36), and the

Union has replied(ECF No. 37). The Courtjlyads no hearing necessary,

D. Md.Local R. 105.6.

For the following reasons, the^C^rt will GRANT the Union's Motion for Attorney's Fees(ECF
No. 33), albeit slightly reduced.
BACKGROUND

In this action to enforce an arbitration award, the Court granted summary judgment in favor
of the Union on November 22, 2023. See ECF Nos. 31, 32. In its Memorandum Opinion of that

date, the Court also found that an award of reasonable attorney's fees to the Union was appropriate
because, in the Court's view, Transdev had litigated the case "without justification." ECF No. 31

at 12 (citing United Food & Com. Workers, Local 400 v. Marval Poultry Co., 876 F.2d 346, 350

(4th Cir. 1989)). Specifically, the Court found that Transdev's "fail[ure] to raise the issue of
mitigation of damages" in the arbitration proceeding underlying this dispute was comparable to the
employer's decision in MarvalPoultry to "sit idle while an arbitration decision[was]rendered"then
1