From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Deatley v. Allard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Oct 5, 2015
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00100-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Oct. 5, 2015)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 14-cv-00100-RM-KMT

10-05-2015

ALAN E. DEATLEY, an individual, 15 CORPORATIONS, INC., a Washington state corporation, and SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company, Plaintiffs, v. KERMIT ALLARD, individual, ROBERT KLICK, individual, DAVE ZAMZOW, individual, ALLARD & KLICK, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company, and EHRHARDT KEEFE STEINER & HOTTMAN, a Colorado Limited Liability Limited Partnership, Defendants.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Defendant EKS&H, LLLP's ("EKS&H") request for Court approved forms of judgment ("Request") in response to the Court's prior order (ECF No. 63) denying a substantially similar request (ECF No. 62). (ECF No. 64.) All other Defendants joined in EKS&H's Request. (ECF No. 64 at 1.) To date Plaintiffs have not filed a response to the Request (see generally Dkt.).

For the below stated reasons, the Court GRANTS EKS&H's Request.

Under Rule 58(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may request that a judgment be set out in a separate document. Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(d). That is the nature of EKS&H's Request. (ECF No. 62.)

On April 13, 2015, the Court entered an order (ECF No. 59) awarding (1) Defendants Kermit Allard, Robert Klick, and Allard Klick & Company, LLC (collectively "Allard Defendants") attorneys' fees and costs in total of $35,759.00; (2) EKS&H attorneys' fees and costs in total of $45,067.94; and (3) Defendant Dave Zamzow ("Zamzow") attorneys' fees in the amount of $15,631.00. The Court awarded these amounts against all Plaintiffs jointly and severally and payable within thirty days. (ECF No. 59 at 8.)

Defendants request that the Court enter an order approving the forms of judgment at the applicable interest rate (ECF Nos. 64-2; 64-3; 64-4). The forms of judgment are sufficient because they identify the date on which the interest begins to accrue. (See generally ECF Nos. 64-2; 64-3; 64-4.) "Post-judgment interest begins to accrue on a judgment for attorneys['] fees on the date the fees were meaningfully ascertained and included in a final appealable judgment." Jane L. v. Bangerter, 920 F. Supp 1202, 1206 (D. Colo. 1996) (citation omitted). In this matter, such date occurred when the Court issued its April 13, 2015 order (ECF No. 59). See MidAmerica Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Shearson/Am. Exp. Inc., 862 F.2d 1470, 1475-76 (10th Cir. 1992).

Based on the foregoing, the Court:

(1) GRANTS EKS&H's Request to approve the tendered forms of judgment (ECF No. 64); and

(2) DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to enter JUDGMENT as set forth in Defendants' proposed judgment forms (ECF Nos. 64-2; 64-3; 64-4).

DATED this 5th day of October, 2015.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_________

RAYMOND P. MOORE

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Deatley v. Allard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Oct 5, 2015
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00100-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Oct. 5, 2015)
Case details for

Deatley v. Allard

Case Details

Full title:ALAN E. DEATLEY, an individual, 15 CORPORATIONS, INC., a Washington state…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Oct 5, 2015

Citations

Civil Action No. 14-cv-00100-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Oct. 5, 2015)