1) HARDIN'S FEES FOR GREER'S DISCLOSURE DISCOVERY VIOLATIONS WERE GRANTED IN FULL. Greer's excuses were all dismissed as meritless and Hardin has until 28 January 2025 to submit his expenses to Greer. The timetable from there goes 14 days to stipulate to award -> if (when) that breaks down Hardin has 14 days to file his request for fees with the court and Greer has 7 days to respond. Assuming these are all in calendar days and federal holidays do not 'pause' the clock this would correspond to an 11 February deadline for Hardin to file his request with the court and an 18 February deadline for Greer to respond.
This is why, as I've pointed out, you don't fuck around with discovery. Unlike most sanctionable conduct, it is nearly mandatory that if you fuck around with discovery and force the judge to deal with it, you're not just going to be paying costs but fees too.
This is both true in federal and state court. For instance, the famous "Pay Quasi" judgment was because Rick Tomlinson insisted on pursuing completely meritless subpoenas in a frivolous case.
This is to encourage parties to resolve such disputes between themselves without wasting the time of the judge, so the party responsible for forcing the judge to deal with this bullshit, that is, the losing party, is punished for that.
Does the cost award include the time wasted with the meet and confers that were ignored?
"Based upon the court’s review of Mr. Greer’s response to the court’s order to show cause, and for the reasons explained below, the court orders Mr. Greer to pay Defendants’ reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, related to Mr. Greer’s failure to disclose or supplement as required by Rule 26(a) or Rule 26(e). 1 ECF No. 130."
So anything reasonable, more or less up to the judge. It's pretty common not to get all you ask for even if you request what seems "reasonable." Even a reduced sanction could be in the thousands.
Friendly reminder that a civil judge can throw you in Jail until you comply
It has to be willful. You have to be able to pay and refuse to do so.
"The parties shall then have 14 days thereafter to attempt to stipulate to the amount of the award. If the parties can agree upon the amount, Mr. Greer shall pay the stipulated expenses award to Defendants within 14 days thereafter. If the parties are unable to agree on the amount, Defendants shall promptly file their affidavit and cost memorandum with the court. Mr. Greer will be provided with 7 days thereafter to file any response. Upon receipt of any such submissions, the court will determine the amount of the expenses award."
Not much wiggle room.
After that there's a judgment against him (I am assuming no agreement will be reached and if there is one it will not be lived up to by Russhole). I believe that collection can be pursued immediately (after the proper formalities) because the award is entirely separate from the case in chief. I'm not sure it would make any actual sense to do that, though, before the rest of the case is resolved.
Does Hardin factor the cost based on his standard rate or what he actually charged?
While that may be a relevant factor, it's really a multifactor analysis relating to something called
quantum meruit, meaning "as much as he is merited." It's supposed to add up to a "reasonable" amount, and factors include the nature of the work (fairly routine although entirely caused by recalcitrance by the other party), the skill with which it was done (pretty good imo), the prevailing rate for such services in the market (Utah is not intensely expensive but no federal practice is cheap), and a few others of greater or lesser importance.
So if Hardin suddenly claimed he's charging the kind of rates you'd pay to Latham & Watkins or something he's not getting that, but it's not going to be cheap. It's going to be painful, even if the judge extends a certain degree of tard mercy, which I'm expecting.
"
