Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

KX ENERGY, INC. v. PANIS, CV 15-25-BU-SEH. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Montana Number: infdco20160502b71 Visitors: 17
Filed: Apr. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 29, 2016
Summary: ORDER SAM E. HADDON , District Judge . On April 13, 2016, the Court entered judgment in this case in favor of Plaintiff, KX Energy, Inc., in the amount of $127,609.00, with post-judgment interest and allowable costs of suit. 1 On April 27, 2016, Plaintiff filed its Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees. 2 The Montana Supreme Court has recognized an equitable exception to the American Rule regarding attorneys' fees stating, "an award of attorney's fees in the absence of a contract or statut
More

ORDER

On April 13, 2016, the Court entered judgment in this case in favor of Plaintiff, KX Energy, Inc., in the amount of $127,609.00, with post-judgment interest and allowable costs of suit.1 On April 27, 2016, Plaintiff filed its Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees.2

The Montana Supreme Court has recognized an equitable exception to the American Rule regarding attorneys' fees stating, "an award of attorney's fees in the absence of a contract or statutory basis will be narrowly applied, and will be limited to those cases in which the prevailing party has been forced to defend against a frivolous or malicious action.3

In this case, Defendant, Gregory Peter Panis, filed two motions. First, a motion to dismiss,4 and second, after default was entered,5 an Affirmation in Opposition for Default Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a).6 Both were denied.7 On April 13, 2016, Plaintiff was awarded the judgment as requested.8

Plaintiff has not demonstrated that it was forced to defend against frivolous or malicious actions by Defendants. No recovery of attorneys' fees is warranted.

ORDERED:

Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorney's Fees9 is DENIED.

FootNotes


1. Doc. 32.
2. Doc. 35.
3. El Dorado Heights Homeowners' Ass'n v. Dewitt, 186 P.3d 1249, 1255 (Mont. 2008) (citin Pankratz Farms, Inc. v. Pankratz, 95 P.3d 671, 687 (Mont. 2004)).
4. Doc. 14.
5. Doc. 18.
6. Doc. 22 (The Court construed the affirmation as a motion to set aside default, addressed it's such and denied it. (See Doc. 24)).
7. Docs. 16 and 24.
8. Doc. 32.
9. Doc. 35.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer