Holmes v. Apple Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:17-cv-04557
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Holmes v. Apple Inc., Judge Ramos granted Amazon’s request for post-offer costs because Holmes rejected an offer matching his later judgment.
Amazon may seek costs incurred after its rejected Rule 68 offer, while Holmes may be required to pay costs covered by the court’s assessment. The order does not specify the amount.
What happened
Holmes v. Apple Inc. involved Tyrone Holmes’s lawsuit against Apple, Amazon, and CheckPoint Fluidic Systems International. Amazon had offered Holmes $2,351.12 to resolve his claims, but he rejected the offer. The court later entered judgment for Holmes against Amazon for that same amount.
Amazon asked the court to shift its costs to Holmes under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68. That rule requires an opposing party to pay costs incurred after an unaccepted settlement offer when the final judgment is not more favorable than the offer. Holmes did not dispute the offer, his rejection, or the matching judgment, but argued about the underlying case and said the offer was improper.
Judge Ramos granted Amazon’s motion for an assessment of costs and directed Amazon to submit a bill of costs within ten days. The order did not specify the amount of costs, and it noted that attorney fees would likely not be available for the contract claims.
The detailed version
- Holmes v. Apple Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-04557
- Ronnie Abrams
- Apr. 14, 2020
Background
Tyrone Holmes, representing himself, sued Apple Inc., Amazon.com, LLC, and CheckPoint Fluidic Systems International, Ltd., asserting eight causes of action. In an earlier order, the court granted Apple’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and CheckPoint’s motion to dismiss. As to Amazon, the court entered judgment on some claims, granted summary judgment on others, and entered judgment for Holmes on a breach-of-contract claim at Amazon’s request.
On December 29, 2017, Amazon made Holmes an offer of judgment for $2,351.12, the stated price of the Apple computer and Apple Care plan he purchased from Amazon. The offer warned that if Holmes proceeded to trial and obtained a judgment less than or equal to that amount, he would be responsible for Amazon’s legal costs incurred after the offer. Holmes rejected the offer. The court later entered judgment for Holmes against Amazon for exactly $2,351.12. The Second Circuit affirmed the court’s decision and remanded for the court to consider Amazon’s request for costs under Rule 68.
Rule 68
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 allows a defending party to offer judgment on specified terms. If the offeree rejects the offer and ultimately obtains a judgment that is not more favorable than the offer, the offeree must pay the costs incurred after the offer was made. The court described Rule 68 as a mandatory cost-shifting rule intended to encourage settlement and reduce unnecessary litigation.
Court’s Analysis
Holmes did not dispute that Amazon made the offer, that he rejected it, or that the later judgment was for the same amount. Instead, he sought to revisit the underlying facts and arguments from the appeal. The court ruled that the motion concerning costs was not the proper vehicle for those arguments. It also rejected Holmes’s contention that Amazon’s offer was a sham, noting that the Second Circuit had found that the offer provided complete relief on his breach-of-contract claims.
Disposition
The court granted Amazon’s motion for an assessment of costs. It directed Amazon to submit a bill of costs within ten days and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion. The order did not state the amount of costs to be awarded. In a footnote, the court noted that attorney fees are generally unavailable for contract claims absent a contrary contractual provision and would likely not be appropriate here.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.