ILNews

Court: Company must pay for suit

Jennifer Nelson
January 1, 2008
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
The Indiana Court of Appeals has ordered a company that brought a frivolous lawsuit to pay for the attorney fees and other costs of the defending party.

In Natare Corporation v. Cardinal Accounts, Inc., 49A05-0704-CV-210, the Court of Appeals granted Natare's motion to tax costs regarding a suit against them brought by Cardinal Accounts. The trial court reinstated Cardinal's complaint, which sat in limbo for months because Cardinal made no action in the case. When Natare appealed the complaint, the Court of Appeals tossed it out, citing Cardinal's lack of any attempt to establish it had a meritorious claim and that the company's multiple unexplained delays didn't constitute exceptional circumstances.

Chief Judge John Baker wrote that Natare should be reimbursed by Cardinal pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 67 the costs of the filing fee, transcript preparation, appendix production, and postage, for a total of $333.68.

The appellate court also granted Natare's attorney fees for the appeal be paid for by Cardinal because Cardinal's suit was clearly frivolous.

"Natare was forced to appeal the erroneous result of the frivolous litigation and should not have to bear the financial burden of its attorneys' services during the appellate process," wrote Chief Judge Baker.

The appellate court remands the issue to the trial court to determine the amount of attorney fees owed to Natare, as well as to order Cardinal to pay Natare's costs in the amount of $333.68.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Frankly, it is tragic that you are even considering going to an expensive, unaccredited "law school." It is extremely difficult to get a job with a degree from a real school. If you are going to make the investment of time, money, and tears into law school, it should not be to a place that won't actually enable you to practice law when you graduate.

  2. As a lawyer who grew up in Fort Wayne (but went to a real law school), it is not that hard to find a mentor in the legal community without your school's assistance. One does not need to pay tens of thousands of dollars to go to an unaccredited legal diploma mill to get a mentor. Having a mentor means precisely nothing if you cannot get a job upon graduation, and considering that the legal job market is utterly terrible, these students from Indiana Tech are going to be adrift after graduation.

  3. 700,000 to 800,000 Americans are arrested for marijuana possession each year in the US. Do we need a new justice center if we decriminalize marijuana by having the City Council enact a $100 fine for marijuana possession and have the money go towards road repair?

  4. I am sorry to hear this.

  5. I tried a case in Judge Barker's court many years ago and I recall it vividly as a highlight of my career. I don't get in federal court very often but found myself back there again last Summer. We had both aged a bit but I must say she was just as I had remembered her. Authoritative, organized and yes, human ...with a good sense of humor. I also appreciated that even though we were dealing with difficult criminal cases, she treated my clients with dignity and understanding. My clients certainly respected her. Thanks for this nice article. Congratulations to Judge Barker for reaching another milestone in a remarkable career.

ADVERTISEMENT