Minit Mart LLC v. Synergy Petroleum Enterprises, Inc.
- Thomas Hixson
- 3:23-cv-02734
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 12
Minit Mart v. Synergy, Judge Hixson denied fees without prejudice but granted pre- and post-judgment interest.
Minit Mart LLC may seek attorneys’ fees again after Synergy’s appeal reaches its mandate, and it receives the ordered pre- and post-judgment interest. Synergy remains subject to the interest awards and may oppose any later fee request.
What happened
Minit Mart LLC sued Synergy Petroleum Enterprises, Inc. for breaching their purchase and sale agreement. The court had previously ruled for Minit Mart on the contract claim and its entitlement to fees and interest.
Minit Mart requested $754,583 in attorneys’ fees, $489,903 in pre-judgment interest, and post-judgment interest of $384.89 per day. Synergy argued that the fee request was premature because the agreement required a final order that could no longer be appealed.
Judge Thomas S. Hixson denied the attorneys’ fee motion without prejudice, allowing Minit Mart to file another fee motion within 14 days after the Ninth Circuit issues its mandate. He granted pre-judgment interest of $441,095.89 at 10% simple interest and granted post-judgment interest at 3.98% from July 2, 2025, until the judgment is paid.
The detailed version
- Minit Mart LLC v. Synergy Petroleum Enterprises, Inc. · No. 3:23-cv-02734
- Thomas Hixson
- Oct. 3, 2025
Background
Minit Mart brought a contract action against Synergy, alleging that Synergy breached the parties’ Purchase and Sale Agreement. The agreement requires Delaware law to govern and includes a fee-shifting provision stating that, after a non-appealable final order, the prevailing party is entitled to legal fees and expenses.
On July 2, 2025, the court granted summary judgment for Minit Mart on its breach-of-contract claim and on its claim for attorneys’ fees and interest. Synergy filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit on July 31, 2025. Minit Mart then moved for $754,583 in attorneys’ fees, $489,903 in pre-judgment interest, and post-judgment interest at $384.89 per day.
Attorneys’ Fees
The court held that the PSA’s language made a non-appealable final order a prerequisite to receiving attorneys’ fees. Because Synergy’s appeal was pending, the court denied Minit Mart’s motion for attorneys’ fees without prejudice. The court directed that any renewed fee request must be filed within 14 days after the Ninth Circuit issues its mandate in Synergy’s appeal. The court did not decide the requested amount or the parties’ disagreement about whether the fees were reasonable.
Pre-Judgment Interest
The court granted Minit Mart’s motion for pre-judgment interest. It determined that interest should run from April 19, 2023, the date the court identified as Synergy’s breach of the PSA’s requirement to deposit $2 million in earnest money, through July 2, 2025, the date judgment was entered.
The court applied Delaware’s 10% legal interest rate and calculated interest as simple interest, meaning interest on the principal rather than on accumulated interest. It awarded Minit Mart $441,095.89 in pre-judgment interest on the $2 million liquidated-damages award. The court rejected Minit Mart’s request for monthly compounding.
Post-Judgment Interest
The court granted Minit Mart’s motion for post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961. It set the rate at 3.98%, beginning July 2, 2025, and continuing until the judgment is satisfied. Because attorneys’ fees had not yet been awarded, the court stated that post-judgment interest could not include attorneys’ fees that might be awarded later.
Disposition
The court denied without prejudice Minit Mart’s motion for attorneys’ fees, granted the motion for pre-judgment interest, and granted the motion for post-judgment interest. It stated that it would issue an amended judgment reflecting the pre- and post-judgment interest awards.
Read the full 12-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.