- 28 - On March 14, 2001, Ms. Spaid faxed respondent 140 pages of additional proposed exhibits to be incorporated into the second stipulation of facts. All the documents related to frivolous issues. Ms. Zusi spent 10 hours reviewing the documents and preparing her objections. We order Ms. Spaid to reimburse respondent for 10 hours of Ms. Zusi’s time. On March 15, 2001, Ms. Zusi and Ms. Moe participated in a conference call with the Court and Ms. Spaid regarding the second stipulation of facts. Ms. Spaid faxed the proposed second stipulation of facts to Ms. Zusi. Upon Ms. Zusi’s review, she noted that none of her objections were shown on the proposed stipulation. Ms. Zusi spent 10 hours reviewing and revising the proposed second stipulation of facts. Ms. Moe spent .5 hour reviewing Ms. Zusi’s revisions. While the entire second stipulation of facts is frivolous, we believe that the lack of objections and other organizational defects that Ms. Zusi corrected were due to Ms. Spaid’s negligence. We therefore order Ms. Spaid to reimburse respondent for 5 hours of Ms. Zusi’s time. We do not order Ms. Spaid to reimburse any of Ms. Moe’s time because we believe any time she spent on the frivolous issues was negligible. March 16, 2001, was the first day of trial; both Ms. Zusi and Ms. Moe represented respondent. Approximately 5 of the 10 hours of the first day of trial were spent dealing with frivolousPage: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011