From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cascade General, Inc. v. Powerhouse Diesel Services

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Apr 28, 2008
No. 05-1334-HU (D. Or. Apr. 28, 2008)

Opinion

No. 05-1334-HU.

April 28, 2008

Jill Schneider, Schwabe, Williamson Wyatt, Portland, Oregon, Attorney for plaintiff.

Robert L. Aldisert, Cody M. Weston, Perkins Coie, Portland, Oregon, Attorneys for defendant.


ORDER


Plaintiff Cascade General, Inc. (Cascade) moves the court for an award of attorney's fees to be deducted from the judgment. The motion is denied. Cascade's attorney's fees for the time spent preparing for trial a second time due to Powerhouse's request to postpone the trial shall be submitted as part of Cascade's request for its attorney's fees claimed as a prevailing party on its breach of contract claims.

The court has entered judgment on the parties' respective breach of contract claims. Both parties are entitled to attorney's fees on breach of contract claims. Prior to the commencement of trial, on May 15, 2006, defendant Powerhouse made an oral motion for a continuance because one of its key employee witnesses resigned and moved out of the United States precipitously. I granted the continuance over the objection of Cascade but entered an order that Cascade would be awarded fees reasonably incurred for having to prepare for trial twice (doc. # 86). Cascade prevailed in part on its breach of contract claim and is thus entitled to its reasonable prevailing party attorney's fees. This will include, no doubt, Cascade's fees for preparing for trial twice. Review of that portion of the fees is best done together with the rest of Cascade's fee petition, in context. Cascade is not entitled to these duplicated trial preparation fees twice, once as prevailing party and again as a sanction, if you will, for Powerhouse's request for continuance. The request for continuance granted by the court made it certain Cascade would get the costs of preparing for trial a second time regardless of whether it prevailed on its breach of contract claim.

Plaintiff's Motion to Reduce Powerhouse's Judgment (doc. # 131) is DENIED.

The court will set a scheduling and status conference to discuss and schedule briefing for attorney's fees.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Cascade General, Inc. v. Powerhouse Diesel Services

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Apr 28, 2008
No. 05-1334-HU (D. Or. Apr. 28, 2008)
Case details for

Cascade General, Inc. v. Powerhouse Diesel Services

Case Details

Full title:CASCADE GENERAL, INC., Plaintiff, v. POWERHOUSE DIESEL SERVICES, INC.…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Apr 28, 2008

Citations

No. 05-1334-HU (D. Or. Apr. 28, 2008)