Universal Truck & Equipment Company, Inc. et al v. Caterpillar, Inc. et al
Filing
129
ORDER re: #106 MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Southworth-Milton, Inc. So Ordered by Judge William E. Smith on 5/8/13. (Jackson, Ryan)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
___________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
CATERPILLAR, INC., et al.,
)
)
Defendants,
)
)
and
)
)
CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES
)
CORPORATION and
)
SOUTHWORTH-MILTON, INC.,
)
)
Defendants and
)
Plaintiffs-in)
Counterclaim.
)
___________________________________)
UNIVERSAL TRUCK & EQUIPMENT
COMPANY, INC., NEW LONDON MINING,
MANUFACTURING & PROCESSING, LLC,
NICHOLAS E. CAMBIO, VINCENT A.
CAMBIO, and NICHOLAS E. CAMBIO,
as Trustee of THE NICHOLAS E.
CAMBIO, RODNEY A. MALAFRONTE AND
VINCENT A. CAMBIO TRUST,
C.A. No. 10-466 S
Order
WILLIAM E. SMITH, United States District Judge.
On April 30, 2013, this Court held a hearing on Defendant
Southworth-Milton, Inc.’s (“Southworth”) Motion for Attorneys’
Fees.
(ECF No. 106.)
At the conclusion of the hearing the Court
announced its ruling from the bench.
This Order is designed to
memorialize the Court’s ruling at the hearing and specify the
amount owed.
The
Court
may
award
Southworth
its
attorneys’
fees
reliance on either its inherent power or Rhode Island law.
in
“It
is beyond serious dispute that a federal court possesses inherent
power to shift attorneys’ fees when parties conduct litigation in
bad faith.”
Jones v. Winnepesaukee Realty, 990 F.2d 1, 4 (1st
Cir. 1993) (citing Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752,
765-766 (1980)).
Additionally, Rhode Island General Laws section
9–1–45 allows a court to award reasonable attorneys’ fees to the
prevailing party in a breach of contract case if there is a
complete lack of justiciable issues of law or fact.
R.I. Gen.
Laws § 9–1–45.
Plaintiffs’ allegations against Southworth in this case are
clearly
frivolous.
As
I
stated
when
ruling
on
Southworth’s
Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiffs’ claims that Southworth
was
a
“third-party
beneficiary”
to
the
contract
between
New
London Mining, Manufacturing & Processing, LLC and Caterpillar
Financial Services Corporation was without support in the law.
(Hearing Tr. 19:21-25, July 19, 2012, ECF No. 103.)
Plaintiffs’
allegations that Southworth entered into an oral contract with
any Plaintiffs is similarly without merit.
Such baseless claims
present no justiciable issues of law or fact and exhibit bad
faith
on
the
part
of
Plaintiffs.
2
Therefore,
an
award
of
attorneys’
fees
to
Southworth
is
warranted.
Accordingly,
Southworth’s motion was GRANTED and Plaintiffs were ordered to
pay Southworth its attorneys’ fees, amounting to $69,333.00.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ William E. Smith
William E. Smith
United States District Judge
Date: May 8, 2013
3
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?