Judge to rule after heated discovery hearing over attorney fees in pool-contractor case

A Cheatham County judge heard arguments Wednesday over whether the court should award attorney fees after granting a motion to compel discovery in a civil dispute between Douglas Simmons and Sundance Pool & Spa Inc. Counsel for the plaintiff, Noel Bagwell, asked the court to make an award of reasonable costs and attorney fees explicit in a previously entered order; defense counsel argued the opposition was “substantially justified” by a mutually held assumption that discovery was paused pending mediation.

Bagwell told the court the motion to compel had been granted and no finding was made that the plaintiff’s motion was substantially unjustified; he urged the court to “follow the plain language of the rule” and award fees under Rule 37. Defense counsel said the parties had a reasonable, albeit informal, expectation that discovery was paused while the parties prepared for mediation and that the opposition to the motion was not filed in bad faith. The defense said communication lapses occurred on both sides and that an award of fees would be unjust.

The judge repeatedly cautioned counsel about allegations of dishonesty and the duty of candor toward the court, and said he would review the pleadings and issue an opinion on the fee question in the coming days. The judge observed that while the rule’s language typically requires a court to award fees when a motion to compel is granted, exceptions exist where the opposition was “substantially justified” or where an award would be unjust.

Why it matters: Awards of discovery-related attorney fees can shift litigation costs and set a precedent for how local litigants handle discovery and mediation scheduling. The case illustrates the court’s role in policing discovery conduct and the fine line between tactical disagreement and sanctionable obstruction.

What was in dispute: Plaintiff’s counsel said the defense received two formal Rule 37 notices and failed to cure deficient discovery responses despite opportunities to do so. Defense counsel said an intervening family death and a partner’s trial led to communication lapses and that both sides shared responsibility for any miscommunication about pausing discovery for mediation.

What the judge said: The judge said he would review the record, emphasized professional responsibility, and said both counsel are “good lawyers.” He asked for time to make a written ruling and said he would provide an opinion within a few days.

Next steps: The court will issue a written ruling on whether attorney fees under the discovery rule must be entered; that decision will determine whether the plaintiff will receive an award of reasonable costs and fees for pursuing the motion to compel.