Sysco Minnesota, Inc. v. Teamsters Local 120

Background

Sysco brought the underlying action under section 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, which governs certain lawsuits involving collective-bargaining agreements. The Court had previously granted summary judgment for Sysco after finding that Teamsters Local 120 breached its agreement with Sysco. The Eighth Circuit affirmed that ruling. After the appeal, Sysco renewed its motion for attorney’s fees, prejudgment interest, expert-witness fees, private service-of-process fees, and other costs.

Attorney’s Fees

Sysco requested $234,505.50 in attorney’s fees. Teamsters Local 120 did not dispute the hours or hourly rates, but argued that the statute and case law did not support an award. The Court explained that section 301 does not authorize attorney’s fees for the prevailing party merely because it won. Fees may be awarded only when the losing party clearly acted in bad faith, meaning its position was frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless, or it continued litigating after its position clearly became so.

The Court rejected Sysco’s argument that Local 120’s unsuccessful position itself established bad faith. Although the Court had found that Local 120 breached its agreement, it found that Local 120’s conduct did not rise to the level of bad faith. Sysco’s request for attorney’s fees was denied.

Prejudgment Interest

Sysco requested $25,487.92 in prejudgment interest, calculated from the date of Local 120’s violation of the collective-bargaining agreement. Local 120 argued that interest was unavailable because Sysco did not suffer all of its damages on that date, the damages were not ascertainable without expert testimony, and Local 120 had asked Sysco to arbitrate rather than litigate.

The Court rejected those arguments. It noted that Local 120 waited more than nine months after the lawsuit began before mentioning arbitration and had therefore waived any right to arbitrate the matter. The Court also found that the damages were sufficiently ascertainable and that the date used by Sysco was not unreasonable. It awarded Sysco $25,487.92 in prejudgment interest.

Expert-Witness Fees

Sysco requested $38,072.50 for its expert witness. The Court explained that recoverable costs generally are limited to those listed in 28 U.S.C. § 1920. It further explained that, under the cited rules and precedent, certain expert-witness costs connected to a deposition and responding to discovery may be recoverable, but the precedent did not support charging the losing party with the expert’s entire fee.

The Court found that the expert’s work was not particularly necessary and that the case was not complex. It therefore ruled that Sysco was not entitled to taxation of the expert witness’s full fee. The Court noted that a separate $371.41 amount for the expert’s deposition appeared taxable and that Local 120 did not object to the total witness-fee amount included in the bill of costs.

Private Service-of-Process Fee

Sysco requested $215 for service of the summons and complaint by a private process server. The Court held that controlling Eighth Circuit precedent did not allow the cost of a private process server to be taxed. The request for that $215 cost was denied.

Other Costs and Disposition

Sysco also requested non-expert witness fees, a filing fee, transcript costs, copying costs, and docket fees. Local 120 did not oppose those items. The Court allowed the costs included in Sysco’s bill of costs except for the $215 private-service charge, resulting in a cost judgment of $7,973.35.

Judge Paul A. Magnuson ordered that Sysco’s renewed motion for attorney’s fees and other costs and expenses was granted in part and denied in part. The Court separately ordered that Sysco receive $25,487.92 in prejudgment interest, that the bill of costs was granted in part and denied in part, and that the Clerk amend the prior judgment to add the awarded costs and interest.