Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00508/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00508-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 450
Nature of Suit: Interstate Commerce
Cause of Action: 

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

TRANSPORT FACTORING

ASSOCIATES INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED CAPITAL FUNDING CORP.,

Defendant.

NO. : CV-05-508-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Non-Taxable

Expenses (Doc. No. 25). After considering the arguments in Defendant's Motion, the Court

issues the following Order.

BACKGROUND

For the purposes of this Order, the Court will focus on the facts relevant to

Defendant's Motion for Attorney's Fees and Non-Taxable Expenses (Doc No. 25). 

On February 14, 2005, Plaintiff Transport Factoring Associates, Inc. ("Plaintiff") filed

a Complaint (Doc. No. 1) against Defendant United Capital Funding Corporation

("Defendant") in which Plaintiff requested: 1) a declaratory judgment pursuant to both

U.S.C. § 2201 and §2202 to determine the parties' respective entitlements as assignees in

Case 2:05-cv-00508-SMM Document 26 Filed 06/30/06 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

-2-

regard to their respective assignors' entitlements, and 2) a judgment for Plaintiff in the sum

of $12,250, or another sum certain to which Plaintiff is able to establish it is entitled.

On March 16, 2005, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of both personal

and subject matter jurisdiction (Doc. No. 8). On January 4, 2006, the Court granted

Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 23) for lack of personal jurisdiction. The same

day, a judgment was entered in favor of Defendant (Doc. No. 24). On January 18, 2006,

Defendant filed a Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Non-Taxable Expenses (Doc. No. 25).

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Attorneys' fees are not ordinarily taxable as costs against the losing party. See

Hensley v. Eckerhart 461 U.S. 424, 429 (1983). This Court is authorized, however, to

award fees to a successful party in any contract action. ARIZ. REV. STAT. §12-341.01(A). 

Section 12-341.01 does not make a favorable judgment on the merits a prerequisite for a

"successful" party seeking attorneys' fees. Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Mem'l Hosp., 710

P.2d 1025, 1047-48 (Ariz. 1985), superseded by statute, A.R.S. §23-1501, et seq. The

award of reasonable fees is discretionary, and Ariz. Rev. Stat. §12-341.01 does not

establish a presumption that fees be awarded in such actions. Assoc'd Indem. Corp. v.

Warner, 694 P.2d 1181, 1182-83 (Ariz. 1985). "The award of reasonable attorney fees

pursuant to subsection A (of §12-341.01) should be made to mitigate the burden of the

expense of litigation to establish a just claim or a just defense. It need not equal or relate

to the attorney fees actually paid or contracted, but the award may not exceed the amount

paid or agreed to be paid." ARIZ. REV. STAT. §12-341.01(B) (parenthetical added). The

party requesting an award of attorneys' fees pursuant to §12-341.01 has the burden of

proving entitlement to such an award. Woerth v. City of Flagstaff, 808 P.2d 297, 304

(Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).

Pursuant to Rule 54(d)(2)(D) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court

has established special procedures for resolving attorneys' fees requests. Rule 54.2 of the

Case 2:05-cv-00508-SMM Document 26 Filed 06/30/06 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

-3-

Local Rules of Civil Procedure ("LRCiv") of the United States District Court for the

District of Arizona governs claims for attorneys' fees and related non-taxable expenses. 

LRCiv 54.2(b)(1) provides that unless otherwise provided by statute or court order, a

party seeking an award of attorneys' fees and related non-taxable expenses must file and

serve a motion for attorneys' fees and related non-taxable expenses within fourteen days

of the entry of judgment in the action. The moving party must also submit a

memorandum in support of a motion for award of attorneys' fees and related non-taxable

expenses within sixty days of the entry of judgment in the action. LRCiv 54.2(b)(2). The

memorandum must include a discussion of the following matters with corresponding

headings in the order listed below: 1) eligibility, 2) entitlement, and 3) reasonableness of

requested award. LRCiv 54.2(c)(1)-(3). In addition, pursuant to LRCiv 54.2(d), the

following documents shall be attached to the memorandum: 1) a statement of

consultation, 2) a copy of the fee agreement, 3) a task-based itemized statement of fees

and expenses, 4) an affidavit of moving counsel, and 5) any other affidavits or

evidentiary matter deemed appropriate or required by law. LRCiv 54.2(d).

DISCUSSION

A party seeking an award of attorneys' fees and related non-taxable expenses must

comply with the requirements of LRCiv 54.2. The Court finds that Defendant has failed

to comply with of sections (b), (c), and (d) of LRCiv 54.2. Under A.R.S. §12-341.01, the

moving party has the burden of proving entitlement to an award of attorneys' fees. 

Woerth, 808 P.2d at 304.

LRCiv 54.2(b)(2) requires a party seeking an award of attorneys' fees to submit a

memorandum in support a motion for award of attorneys' fees and related non-taxable

expenses within sixty days of entry of judgment in the action. LRCiv 54.2(c) specifies

that the memorandum must contain three discrete sections discussing the party's

eligibility and entitlement to a fee award, and the reasonableness of the requested award.

Case 2:05-cv-00508-SMM Document 26 Filed 06/30/06 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

-4-

LRCiv 54.2(d) requires that the following documents be attached to the memorandum: 1)

a statement of consultation, 2) a copy of the fee agreement, 3) a task-based itemized

statement of fees and expenses, 4) an affidavit of moving counsel, and 5) any other

affidavits or evidentiary matter deemed appropriate or required by law. 

Here, judgment was entered on January 4, 2006 (Doc. No. 24) and the Court has

not yet received a memorandum of points and authorities in support of Defendant's

motion for attorneys' fees. LRCiv 54(c). Nor has Defendant supplied the Court with any

of the documents specified in LRCiv 54(d). Because Defendant has failed to comply

with the requirements of LRCiv 54.2, the Court lacks sufficient information to decide the

propriety of awarding fees in this case, and thus Defendant has not satisfied its burden of

proving entitlement to such an award. Woerth, 808 P.2d at 304.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and NonTaxable Expenses (Doc. No. 25) is DENIED without prejudice to refiling a properly

supported motion, including a memorandum of points and authorities and the required

supporting documentation, no later than July 21, 2006.

DATED this 29th day of June, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-00508-SMM Document 26 Filed 06/30/06 Page 4 of 4