Tompkins v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System

Filing 63

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 60 Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Attorney Fees. Plaintiff's counsel shall pay Defendant $784 in attorney's fees. Defendant's request for additional sanctions is denied. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 10/10/2019. (brl)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:16-cv-00152-RJC-DSC
ANGELINA TOMPKINS, ex. rel. T.S.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOL )
SYSTEM,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions
and Attorney’s Fees. (Doc. No. 60.) The motion is ripe for adjudication.
I.

BACKGROUND
On July 11, 2018, the Court entered a Pretrial Order and Case Management

Plan. (Doc. No. 34.) Pursuant to the Pretrial Order, the trial was scheduled to begin
on May 6, 2019, the parties were required to file their final witness and exhibits lists
on or before April 8, 2019, and the parties were required to both exchange exhibits
and file a trial brief on or before April 22, 2019. In addition, pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3)(B), the parties were required to make pretrial disclosures
on or before April 8, 2019.
Plaintiff failed to comply with the above deadlines. As a result, on April 22,
2019, Defendant, having complied with the pretrial deadlines, filed a motion in limine
to exclude any witness, document, and exhibit that Plaintiff was required to disclose
on or before April 8, 2019. (Doc. No. 46.)

The Court held a pretrial conference on April 24, 2019. During the conference,
the Court found that Plaintiff had failed to comply with the pretrial deadlines set
forth in the Court’s order. Accordingly, the Court ordered Plaintiff’s counsel to pay a
$1,000 fine and an additional $100 per day until counsel complied with the Pretrial
Order. That same day, Plaintiff filed her final exhibit and witness lists. (Doc. Nos.
48 to 49.) On April 26, 2019, Plaintiff filed a trial brief. (Doc. No. 47.) Plaintiff
contends that she shared her exhibits with Defendant on April 24, 2019. Defendant,
however, contends that it did not receive a copy of Plaintiff’s exhibits until the
morning of trial.
Defendant now moves for sanctions and attorney’s fees pursuant to Rules 16(f)
and 37(c).
II.

DISCUSSION
“Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a Court may

impose sanctions against a party or its attorneys, including those authorized by Rule
37(b)(2)(A)(ii)–(vii), where a party or its attorney: (1) fails to appear at a pretrial
conference; (2) is substantially unprepared to participate or does not participate in
good faith in the conference; or (3) fails to obey a scheduling order or pretrial order.”
RDLG, LLC v. RPM Grp. Brokerage, LLC, No. 1:10-cv-204, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
144388, at *9 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 4, 2012). Rule 16(f) further provides that “[i]nstead of
or in addition to any other sanction, the court must order the party, its attorney, or
both to pay the reasonable expenses—including attorney’s fees—incurred because of
any noncompliance with this rule, unless the noncompliance was substantially

2

justified or other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust.” Fed. R. Civ. P.
16(f)(2).
Under Rule 37(c), if a party fails to provide information or identify a witness
as required by Rule 26(a) or (e), the Court, on motion and after giving an opportunity
to be heard, may order payment of the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees,
caused by the failure and may impose other appropriate sanctions. Fed. R. Civ. P.
37(c)(1). The imposition of sanctions under Rule 37(c) is within the district court’s
broad discretion. See Southern States Rack & Fixture, Inc. v. Sherwin-Williams Co.,
318 F.3d 592, 595 (4th Cir. 2003).
The Court concludes that Plaintiff’s noncompliance with the Pretrial Order
was not substantially justified and no circumstances make an award of expenses
unjust. Thus, the Court must, pursuant to the express language of Rule 16(f), order
Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s counsel, or both to pay Defendant’s reasonable expenses,
including attorney’s fees.

RDLG, LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144388, at *14.

Defendant seeks attorney’s fees in the amount of $784 that it incurred in drafting
Defendant’s motion in limine as a result of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the
Pretrial Order. Plaintiff does not contest the hourly rate or time spent on the motion
in limine, and the Court finds the amount of fees requested to be reasonable.
Therefore, Plaintiff’s counsel shall pay Defendant’s attorney’s fees in the amount of
$784.
Defendant also moves for the imposition of additional sanctions but does not
specify what additional sanctions it seeks. The Court has imposed a fine on Plaintiff’s

3

counsel and ordered Plaintiff’s counsel to pay Defendant’s attorney’s fees incurred as
a result of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Pretrial Order. In the exercise of its
discretion, the Court concludes that no additional sanctions are warranted.
III.

CONCLUSION
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions and

Attorney’s Fees, (Doc. No. 60), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff’s
counsel shall pay Defendant $784 in attorney’s fees.
additional sanctions is denied.

Signed: October 10, 2019

4

Defendant’s request for