The party seeking costs was completely successful on motions regarding whether communications at a meeting were subject to settlement privilege.
The opposing party, who had surreptitiously recorded the meeting and publicly filed the transcript, argued for a costs reduction as a public interest litigant.
The court rejected the public interest litigant argument for these specific motions.
The court also declined to award substantial indemnity costs, finding the conduct did not rise to the level of reprehensible.
The court awarded partial indemnity costs, adjusting the requested hourly rates downwards, fixing costs at $136,315.
