Case Name: Jonathan STEWART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEOSTAR CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-07-06
Citations: 431 F. App'x 432
Docket Number: No. 10-1180
Parties: Jonathan STEWART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEOSTAR CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: NORRIS, ROGERS, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 431
Pages: 432–432

Head Matter:
Jonathan STEWART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEOSTAR CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 10-1180.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
July 6, 2011.
Before: NORRIS, ROGERS, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff Jonathan Stewart appeals the decision of the district court denying him attorneys fees after succeeding with litigation against defendant GeoStar Corporation.
Under the governing law of the state of Delaware, plaintiff was required to prove by clear evidence that defendant "engaged in bad faith conduct, which unnecessarily prolonged or delayed [the] litigation or knowingly asserted frivolous claims." Nagy v. Bistricer, 770 A.2d 43, 64-65 (Del.Ch.2000) (internal quotations marks omitted). Because the district court was "unable to find that Defendant defended this action in bad faith, nor that any specific argument made by Defendant was made in bad faith," it denied attorneys' fees.
We review the district court's conclusion not to award an attorney fees sanction for abuse of discretion. Fieger v. Cox, 524 F.3d 770, 774 (6th Cir.2008). Having reviewed the cold record in this case, the briefs of the parties, and having entertained oral argument, we are unable to say that the district court abused its discretion in denying plaintiffs request for attorneys' fees.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed based on the reasoning set forth in its Order filed on November 5, 2009.