Southern Wine and Spirits, etc. v. Mountain Valley Spring Co., No. 12-1857 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseThis case stemmed from a contract dispute between Mountain Valley and Southern. Southern subsequently obtained a judgment against Mountain Valley and, simultaneously, Mountain Valley obtained a judgment against Southern on its counterclaim. Both parties then appealed from the judgment of the district court denying each party attorney's fees and costs for the litigation. The court held that the district court was within its discretion to find that neither party qualified as the prevailing party under Nevada law. Because the court affirmed the denial of attorney's fees to Southern, the court need not discuss Mountain Valley's protective claim for its own attorney's fees. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Civil case - Contracts. For the court's prior opinion in the case, see Southern Wine & Spirits of Nevada v. Mountain Valley Spring Co., 646 F.3d 526 (8th Cir. 2011). District court order denying Southern's motion for attorneys' fees is affirmed, as the district court was within its discretion in finding that neither party in the case qualified as the prevailing party under Nevada law.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.