Hilborn v. Chaw Khong Tech Co

Filing 102

ORDER awarding attorney's fees and 100 Bill of Costs filed by David Hilborn. Signed by District Judge Paul D Borman. (DGoo)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DAVID HILBORN, Plaintiff, vs. CHAW KHONG TECHNOLOGY, CO., LTD., Defendant. / ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS TO PLAINTIFF On September 15, 2008, the Court ordered Defendant Chaw Kong Technology Co., Ltd. to pay Plaintiff's counsel Carl F. Schier's reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred in attending the September 11, 2008 settlement conference and the costs of witness Douglas Kowalski's round trip plane ticket from China purchased for the purpose of testifying at the trial, which was scheduled to begin on September 12, 2008 (Dkt. No. 99). The Court ordered Defendant to pay these fees and costs because it failed to produce Joe Lin or another company officer at the September 11, 2008 settlement conference. Pursuant to the Court's Order, on September 29, 2008 , Plaintiff filed with the Court a Bill of Costs in the amount of $3,405.00 (Dkt. No. 100). Plaintiff's Bill of Costs contained a cost breakdown of Mr. Schier's attorney fees for appearing at the September 11, 2008 settlement conference and proof of costs for the airplane ticket of his witness, Mr. Kowalski, incurred as a result of Defendant's acts as described. Defendant has not made any objections to Plaintiff's Bill of Costs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 03-cv-71726 DISTRICT JUDGE PAUL D. BORMAN MAGISTRATE JUDGE MONA K. MAJZOUB Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Defendant to pay $3,405.00 to Plaintiff's counsel Carl F. Schier on or before October 16, 2008. SO ORDERED. s/Paul D. Borman PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: October 2, 2008 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Copies of this Order were served on the attorneys of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on October 2, 2008. s/Denise Goodine Case Manager 2

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?