FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 202~HAR-8 PH 5: 05 CLERK OF COURT 2
3 BY=- - - - ~ - - - 4
5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 6 SHEN WEI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY, CIVIL CASE NO. CV0554-2 l 7 Plaintiff, 8 vs. DECISION AND ORDER 9 Re: Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend SIMPLE, LLC, DOES I-et al., Judgment 10 Defendants. 11
12 This matter came before the Honorable Arthur R. Barcinas on a Motion to Alter or 13 Amend Judgment ("Motion") filed by Defendant Simple, LLC ("Defendant"), on October 13, 14 2023. The Motion requests that the Court amend its October 6, 2023 Judgment to: (1) conform 15 to the format prescribed in Guam Rules of Civil Procedure ("GRCP") Form 32; (2) include 16 language to clarify that the mechanic's lien recorded by Plaintiff Shen Wei Construction 17 Company ("Plaintiff') be released; and (3) award court costs and reasonable attorney's fees to 18 Defendant pursuant to 5 GCA § 32109. Upon consideration of the briefings and the record, the 19 Court GRANTS the Motion for the reasons below. 20 BACKGROUND 21 On October 6, 2023, the Court issued its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 22 ("FFCL"), finding in favor of Defendant and determining that Plaintiffs Complaint failed 23
24 Decision and Order Civil Case No. CV0554-21 , Shen Wei v. Simple, LLC
1 because Plaintiff did not meet its burden of proving its claims by a preponderance of the
2 evidence. In the associated Judgment, the Court declined to award any attorney's fees or costs.
3 On October 13, 2023, Defendant filed the instant Motion. On December 12, 2023,
4 Plaintiff filed its opposition to the Motion. On December 26, 2023, Defendant filed its reply. On
5 January 16, 2024, the Court held a hearing on the Motion, and the parties agreed to submit on
6 the briefs. The Court subsequently took the matter under advisement.
7 DISCUSSION
8 Defendant files its motion to alter or amend the Judgment under GRCP 59(e). Pursuant
9 to GRCP 59(e), any motion to alter or amend a judgment shall be filed no later than ten (10)
10 days after entry of judgment. The motion having been so filed within ten days, the motion is
11 timely and may be properly considered under GRCP 59(e).
12 I. Legal Standard
13 Under the GRCP 59(e) standard, motions for reconsideration are appropriate where the
14 trial court: (1) is presented with new evidence; (2) committed clear error or the decision was
15 manifestly unjust; or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law. Rong Chang Co.,
16 Ltd. v. M2P, Inc., 2012 Guam 1 ,r 16.
17 II. Defendant is entitled to attorney's fees and court costs.
18 Defendant argues that it is necessary to amend the judgment to "amend a manifest error
19 of law or to prevent a manifest injustice." Mot., at 1. Defendant claims that "[t]he issues herein
20 are not an attempt to present a new legal theory, raise new arguments for the first time, or
21 present evidence. They are primarily to correct the form of the Judgment and to include
22 statutory attorney's fees and costs to be awarded to Simple, LLC." Id. Defendant argues that it
24 Page 2 of5 Decision and Order Civil Case No. CV0554-21, Shen Wei v. Simple, LLC
1 is entitled to attorney's fees because he prevailed under the Deceptive Trade Practices -
2 Consumer Protection Act ("DTPA"). Upon review, the Court agrees.
3 5 GCA § 32109 provides that each consumer who prevails under the DTP A shall be
4 awarded court costs and reasonable and necessary attorney's fees. GRCP 4(d) grants the Court
5 discretion to not allow costs, except when express provision is made in a Guam statute.
6 Defendant requests that, because 5 GCA § 32109 is mandatory, the Court amend its judgment to
7 include the award of attorney's fees and costs based on Plaintiff's violation of the DTP A.
8 Plaintiff disputes the award of attorney's fees and court costs, arguing that the operative
9 word in § 3 2109 is "prevail," which, according to Plaintiff, is not defined under the DTP A, and
10 the issue of when attorney's fees and costs must be awarded to a prevailing party under the
11 DTP A has never been addressed by the Guam Supreme Court. Opp., at 5. Plaintiff cites to
12 Texas law for its definition of "prevail," arguing that an award of attorney's fees and costs is not
13 appropriate where the claimant is not awarded any damages. Opp., at 6 (citing Cooper v. Lyon
14 Financial Services., Inc., 65 S.W.3d 197 (Tex. 2001); Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Low, 79
15 S.W.3d 561 (Tex. 2002).
16 The Court does not find the Texas cases persuasive for two reasons. First, other
17 jurisdictions with similarly-constructed DTPA statutes have held that damages are not necessary
18 to award attorney's fees. See, e.g., Goomai v. H&E Ent., LLC, 2023 WL 7103191 ,i 1 (Ct. App.
19 Ohio) (holding that, for the purposes of awarding attorney's fees, "a party prevails on a DTPA
20 claim when the finder of fact determines the statute has been violated, regardless of whether a
21 damages amount is awarded to remedy the violation."); Dennis Simmons, D.D.S., P.S. v.
22 Modern Aero, Inc., 603 N.W.2d 336 (Ct. App. Minn. 1999) (interpreting that, for the purposes
24 Page 3 of5 Decision and Order Civil Case No. CV0554-21, Shen Wei v. Simple, LLC
of awarding attorney's fees, the "prevailing party" language applies only to a claim for
2 injunctive relief under the DTPA).
3 Second, and more importantly, even if the Court does find that an award of damages is
4 necessary to "prevail" and be awarded attorney's fees, the Court's FFCL explicitly states that
5 Defendant sought in its counterclaim for damages caused, inter alia, by Plaintiff's violation of
6 the DTPA. The Court finds this sufficient to meet any alleged statutory requirement for a
7 damages amount, and to accordingly find that Defendant has prevailed under Plaintiffs theory.
8 Therefore, the Court finds, upon review, that it has erred in failing to consider 5 GCA §
9 32109, and GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment. The Court will amend
10 its judgment to include reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
11 III. The Court grants Defendant's request to change the format and include the
12 mechanic's lien language.
13 As to the form of the Judgment, Defendant argues that Local Rule of the Superior Court
14 of Guam ("CVR") 58.l(a) states that a judgment should as much as possible follow the basic
15 format in GRCP Form 32. Defendant states that the Form 32 format includes stating the amount
16 of damages, the statutory interest, and the award of costs and attorney's fees if appropriate
17 based on statute. Defendant further requests that the following language be included in the
18 judgment to make clear that the mechanic's lien recorded by Plaintiff is released:
19 It is accordingly ordered and adjudged that Plaintiff take nothing against Simple, LLC, nor against the property of Simple, LLC, nor shall the alleged lien be 20 foreclosed against the property of Simple, LLC, is fully satisfied and discharged, and Simple, LLC's property, described as: Lot 27, Block I, Tract 2595, Talofofo, 21 Guam, is released from each and all of the liens, claims, and demands.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 202~HAR-8 PH 5: 05 CLERK OF COURT 2
3 BY=- - - - ~ - - - 4
5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 6 SHEN WEI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY, CIVIL CASE NO. CV0554-2 l 7 Plaintiff, 8 vs. DECISION AND ORDER 9 Re: Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend SIMPLE, LLC, DOES I-et al., Judgment 10 Defendants. 11
12 This matter came before the Honorable Arthur R. Barcinas on a Motion to Alter or 13 Amend Judgment ("Motion") filed by Defendant Simple, LLC ("Defendant"), on October 13, 14 2023. The Motion requests that the Court amend its October 6, 2023 Judgment to: (1) conform 15 to the format prescribed in Guam Rules of Civil Procedure ("GRCP") Form 32; (2) include 16 language to clarify that the mechanic's lien recorded by Plaintiff Shen Wei Construction 17 Company ("Plaintiff') be released; and (3) award court costs and reasonable attorney's fees to 18 Defendant pursuant to 5 GCA § 32109. Upon consideration of the briefings and the record, the 19 Court GRANTS the Motion for the reasons below. 20 BACKGROUND 21 On October 6, 2023, the Court issued its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 22 ("FFCL"), finding in favor of Defendant and determining that Plaintiffs Complaint failed 23
24 Decision and Order Civil Case No. CV0554-21 , Shen Wei v. Simple, LLC
1 because Plaintiff did not meet its burden of proving its claims by a preponderance of the
2 evidence. In the associated Judgment, the Court declined to award any attorney's fees or costs.
3 On October 13, 2023, Defendant filed the instant Motion. On December 12, 2023,
4 Plaintiff filed its opposition to the Motion. On December 26, 2023, Defendant filed its reply. On
5 January 16, 2024, the Court held a hearing on the Motion, and the parties agreed to submit on
6 the briefs. The Court subsequently took the matter under advisement.
7 DISCUSSION
8 Defendant files its motion to alter or amend the Judgment under GRCP 59(e). Pursuant
9 to GRCP 59(e), any motion to alter or amend a judgment shall be filed no later than ten (10)
10 days after entry of judgment. The motion having been so filed within ten days, the motion is
11 timely and may be properly considered under GRCP 59(e).
12 I. Legal Standard
13 Under the GRCP 59(e) standard, motions for reconsideration are appropriate where the
14 trial court: (1) is presented with new evidence; (2) committed clear error or the decision was
15 manifestly unjust; or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law. Rong Chang Co.,
16 Ltd. v. M2P, Inc., 2012 Guam 1 ,r 16.
17 II. Defendant is entitled to attorney's fees and court costs.
18 Defendant argues that it is necessary to amend the judgment to "amend a manifest error
19 of law or to prevent a manifest injustice." Mot., at 1. Defendant claims that "[t]he issues herein
20 are not an attempt to present a new legal theory, raise new arguments for the first time, or
21 present evidence. They are primarily to correct the form of the Judgment and to include
22 statutory attorney's fees and costs to be awarded to Simple, LLC." Id. Defendant argues that it
24 Page 2 of5 Decision and Order Civil Case No. CV0554-21, Shen Wei v. Simple, LLC
1 is entitled to attorney's fees because he prevailed under the Deceptive Trade Practices -
2 Consumer Protection Act ("DTPA"). Upon review, the Court agrees.
3 5 GCA § 32109 provides that each consumer who prevails under the DTP A shall be
4 awarded court costs and reasonable and necessary attorney's fees. GRCP 4(d) grants the Court
5 discretion to not allow costs, except when express provision is made in a Guam statute.
6 Defendant requests that, because 5 GCA § 32109 is mandatory, the Court amend its judgment to
7 include the award of attorney's fees and costs based on Plaintiff's violation of the DTP A.
8 Plaintiff disputes the award of attorney's fees and court costs, arguing that the operative
9 word in § 3 2109 is "prevail," which, according to Plaintiff, is not defined under the DTP A, and
10 the issue of when attorney's fees and costs must be awarded to a prevailing party under the
11 DTP A has never been addressed by the Guam Supreme Court. Opp., at 5. Plaintiff cites to
12 Texas law for its definition of "prevail," arguing that an award of attorney's fees and costs is not
13 appropriate where the claimant is not awarded any damages. Opp., at 6 (citing Cooper v. Lyon
14 Financial Services., Inc., 65 S.W.3d 197 (Tex. 2001); Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Low, 79
15 S.W.3d 561 (Tex. 2002).
16 The Court does not find the Texas cases persuasive for two reasons. First, other
17 jurisdictions with similarly-constructed DTPA statutes have held that damages are not necessary
18 to award attorney's fees. See, e.g., Goomai v. H&E Ent., LLC, 2023 WL 7103191 ,i 1 (Ct. App.
19 Ohio) (holding that, for the purposes of awarding attorney's fees, "a party prevails on a DTPA
20 claim when the finder of fact determines the statute has been violated, regardless of whether a
21 damages amount is awarded to remedy the violation."); Dennis Simmons, D.D.S., P.S. v.
22 Modern Aero, Inc., 603 N.W.2d 336 (Ct. App. Minn. 1999) (interpreting that, for the purposes
24 Page 3 of5 Decision and Order Civil Case No. CV0554-21, Shen Wei v. Simple, LLC
of awarding attorney's fees, the "prevailing party" language applies only to a claim for
2 injunctive relief under the DTPA).
3 Second, and more importantly, even if the Court does find that an award of damages is
4 necessary to "prevail" and be awarded attorney's fees, the Court's FFCL explicitly states that
5 Defendant sought in its counterclaim for damages caused, inter alia, by Plaintiff's violation of
6 the DTPA. The Court finds this sufficient to meet any alleged statutory requirement for a
7 damages amount, and to accordingly find that Defendant has prevailed under Plaintiffs theory.
8 Therefore, the Court finds, upon review, that it has erred in failing to consider 5 GCA §
9 32109, and GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment. The Court will amend
10 its judgment to include reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
11 III. The Court grants Defendant's request to change the format and include the
12 mechanic's lien language.
13 As to the form of the Judgment, Defendant argues that Local Rule of the Superior Court
14 of Guam ("CVR") 58.l(a) states that a judgment should as much as possible follow the basic
15 format in GRCP Form 32. Defendant states that the Form 32 format includes stating the amount
16 of damages, the statutory interest, and the award of costs and attorney's fees if appropriate
17 based on statute. Defendant further requests that the following language be included in the
18 judgment to make clear that the mechanic's lien recorded by Plaintiff is released:
19 It is accordingly ordered and adjudged that Plaintiff take nothing against Simple, LLC, nor against the property of Simple, LLC, nor shall the alleged lien be 20 foreclosed against the property of Simple, LLC, is fully satisfied and discharged, and Simple, LLC's property, described as: Lot 27, Block I, Tract 2595, Talofofo, 21 Guam, is released from each and all of the liens, claims, and demands.
22 In its opposition, Plaintiff does not dispute the requested format change or the
23 included mechanic's lien language, but only disputes the award of attorney's fees and
24 Page 4 ofS Decision and Order Civil Case No. CV0554-21, Shen Wei v. Simple, LLC
I court costs. There being no dispute, and the Court having granted Defendant's motion to
2 amend, the Court will additionally amend its judgment to accommodate the Form 32
3 format and mechanic's lien language.
4 CONCLUSION
5 Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend
6 Judgment. Accordingly, the Court RESCINDS its previous Judgment, and will file an
7 Amended Judgment in accordance with GRCP Form 32, to include reasonable attorney's fees
8 and the above language concerning the mechanic's lien. Prior to the issuance of this Amended
9 Judgment, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to submit a Statement of Attorney's Fees and Costs
10 ending on October 6, 2023, when the Judgment was issued, and to attach all invoices, receipts,
11 and other supporting documentation indicating all services for which were charged and were
12 actually and necessarily performed.
13 HAR O8 2024 IT IS SO ORDERED 14 ----------
24 Page 5 ofS