Hobson Fabricating Corp. v. SE/Z Construction, LLC
294 P.3d 171
Idaho2012Background
- DPW hired SE/Z as general contractor on a Bio-Safety Level 3 lab; SE/Z awarded Hobson a mechanical subcontract.
- DPW terminated SE/Z for convenience, leading SE/Z to terminate Hobson.
- Hobson and SE/Z sued DPW for contract damages; prior to trial they settled nearly all claims except costs and fees.
- District court ruled on multiple motions over 30 months, ultimately concluding both sides prevailed in part and each would bear own costs/fees.
- A May 5, 2010 stipulation settled most claims with DPW paying SE/Z $225,000; judgment entered September 27, 2010; Hobson appealed and SE/Z cross-appealed.
- Court affirms district court’s ruling that parties bear their own costs and fees, and that no party is entitled to fees on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prevailing party determination under Rule 54(d)(1)(B) | Contractors: overall prevailing party due to partial wins | DPW: no overall prevailing party since not all claims favored | District court did not abuse discretion; both prevailed in part |
| Need for I.C. 12-117(2) analysis | Contractors sought fees under 12-117(2) for partial prevailment | DPW: not entitled; no adequate preservation of 12-117(2) basis | Court affirmed no analysis under 12-117(2) due to lack of proper preservation |
| Costs awarded against Hobson to individual defendants | DPW: costs against Hobson appropriate as to individual defendants | Hobson: improper treatment of individual defendants’ costs | District court did not abuse discretion; individual defendants owed costs |
| Attorney fees on appeal under I.C. 12-117 | Contractors seeking fees on appeal | DPW: no fees since no prevailing party overall and no basis raised | Neither party entitled to fees on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Bolger v. Lance, 137 Idaho 792 (Idaho 2002) (settlement reach may be considered in prevailing party analysis but not controlling)
- Oakes v. Boise Heart Clinic Physicians, 152 Idaho 540 (Idaho 2012) (defense/partial success can support prevailing party finding)
- Eighteen Mile Ranch, LLC v. Nord Excavating & Paving, Inc., 141 Idaho 716 (Idaho 2005) (partial success supports prevailing party when appropriate)
- Jorgensen v. Coppedge, 148 Idaho 536 (Idaho 2010) (abuse of discretion standard for prevailing party determination)
- Pines Grazing Ass’n, Inc. v. Flying Joseph Ranch, LLC, 151 Idaho 924 (Idaho 2011) (requirement to raise issues to preserve for appeal)