Case Information
*1 Case 2:16-cv-02740-DDC Document 105 Filed 01/08/18 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS NORTH ALABAMA FABRICATING )
COMPANY, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
) v. ) Case No. 16-cv-2740-DDC-TJJ
)
BEDESCHI MID-WEST CONVEYOR )
COMPANY, LLC; DEARBORN )
MID-WEST CONVEYOR COMPANY; )
LARRY HARP; and BRAXTON JONES, )
)
Defendants. ) ORDER CLARIFYING JANUARY 3, 2018 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On January 3, 2018, the Court entered its Memorandum and Order (ECF No. 104) granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions (“Order). That Order sanctioned Defendant Bedeschi for its failure to produce properly prepared Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses for deposition. Specifically, Defendant Bedeschi was ordered to produce an additional corporate representative, or produce Defendant Jones for a second deposition, within thirty days, with such corporate representative being fully prepared, as required by Rule 30(b)(6), to testify regarding Topics 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 set forth in Plaintiff’s Notice, including the alleged “delays and defects in the products shipped by Plaintiff,” the nonconformance reports, and the Inspection Report subsequently produced on August 23, 2017. The Court also ordered Bedeschi to pay “Plaintiff’s reasonable costs and expenses incurred in conducting this deposition, and the cost of the transcript from the deposition.” The parties have since requested that the Court clarify its Order with respect to whether “costs and expenses” in this context includes Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees.
The sanctions imposed against Defendant Bedeschi in this case were ordered pursuant to *2 Case 2:16-cv-02740-DDC Document 105 Filed 01/08/18 Page 2 of 2 Federal R Rule of Civil l Procedure 3 37(d)(3), wh hich requires the Court to o sanction a p party by requ uiring the party failing to ac ct to pay the “reasonable e expenses, i including att torney’s fees s, caused by the failure.” Rule 37(d)(3 3) leaves it t to the Court to determine e what const titutes “reaso onable expen nses, including g attorney’s fees.” In this s case, the C Court clarifie es that “reaso onable costs and expense es” in its Januar ry 3, 2018 O Order shall in nclude the re easonable, ac ctual expens ses incurred b by Plaintiff’ s counsel ( (for one attor rney) traveli ing to and fro om the addit tional depos ition allowe d by the Ord der. It shall also o include the e attorney’s f fees incurred d for Plaintif ff’s counsel t to attend and d take the depositio on, but shall not include any time spe ent preparing g for the dep position. Fin nally, attorne ey’s fees for t time Plaintiff ff’s counsel r reasonably sp pends travel ling to and fr from the depo osition shall l be included, , but shall be e limited to a a maximum of $150 per hour.
IT T IS THER REFORE OR RDERED th hat the partie es’ request fo or clarificati ion of the Co ourt’s January 3 3, 2018 Mem morandum an nd Order (EC CF No. 104) ) is granted.
Dated this 8th D h day of Janu uary 2018, a at Kansas Cit ty, Kansas. Teresa J. James U. S. Mag gistrate Judg ge 2