Opinion ID: 1379405
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Costs and Disbursements on Review.

Text: Plaintiff argues that defendant should not have been awarded costs on appeal. The general rule regarding an award of costs and disbursements in this court is that the prevailing party is entitled to such an award. ORS 20.310(1); ORAP 13.05. In this case, defendant was deemed to be the prevailing party, because it obtained a substantial modification of the lower court judgment by reducing plaintiffs damages on appeal by $71,074.35 on the price discrimination claim and by $25,858.01 on the breach of contract claim. See ORAP 13.05 (appellant or petitioner    is the prevailing party only if the court reverses or substantially modifies the judgment   ). Plaintiff concedes that defendant may have been the prevailing party, but argues, nonetheless, that this case fits within one of the statutory exceptions to the general rule that the prevailing party is entitled to recover costs. Plaintiff argues that this is true because the statute under which it sued provides that plaintiff should be allowed costs and disbursements. ORS 20.310(1) provides in part: In any    review by the Supreme Court, the court shall allow costs and disbursements to the prevailing party, unless a statute provides that in the particular case costs and disbursements shall not be allowed to the prevailing party or shall be allowed to some other party   . (Emphasis added.) Plaintiff sued under the Anti-Price Discrimination Law (APDL). As to the 1982 motorcycles, plaintiff prevailed on liability and damages in all courts. On the 1980 and 1981 models, plaintiff prevailed on liability and obtained a remand on damages. The APDL provides, that as to costs and disbursements: If in [a price discrimination] action, a violation or threatened violation of [the APDL] is established,    the plaintiff in the action is entitled to recover three-fold the damages sustained by the plaintiff, and the costs of suit and a reasonable attorney fee at trial and on appeal.  ORS 646.140. (Emphasis added.) Therefore, plaintiff should have been allowed to recover its costs and disbursements on appeal. In order to recover costs and disbursements, all that a plaintiff must prove is a violation or a threatened violation of the APDL. ORS 646.140(1). Because this court affirmed liability as to all claims, a violation was established which entitles plaintiff to its costs and disbursements under the statute. Plaintiff is allowed costs and disbursements on appeal in the amount of $139.95.