Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Terrence Gore filed for bankruptcy in 2015 and later disputed Trans Union’s inclusion of the bankruptcy in his credit file. After unsuccessfully seeking its removal, he brought multiple lawsuits alleging that Trans Union had reported false and derogatory information. His first action ended in summary judgment in state court, and his second was dismissed in federal court.
Gore’s third lawsuit asserted several claims, including claims under Chapter 20 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code, and sought more than $1.3 million. The district court dismissed the claims on res judicata grounds. It later awarded Trans Union $32,006.30 in attorney fees, although Trans Union had requested $28,911.40, and denied Gore’s Rule 59(e) motion seeking reconsideration of the dismissal and fee award.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit affirmed. Liberally construing Gore’s pro se filings, the court concluded that it could review the denial of reconsideration as to both the attorney-fee award and the judgment on the pleadings. But Gore’s arguments challenging the dismissal raised matters that could and should have been presented before judgment and did not establish any legal defect or other basis for Rule 59(e) relief.
The court also upheld the fee award. It held that the Texas statute unconditionally provides attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party, unlike the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which requires bad faith or harassment before a prevailing defendant may recover fees. Gore failed to establish that federal law preempted the Texas provision. He forfeited his fee-segregation argument by not raising it before the magistrate judge and forfeited his objection to the award exceeding Trans Union’s request by not raising that issue in his reconsideration motion. His due-process claim lacked record support.
Key Takeaways
- A prevailing party may recover fees under the applicable Texas credit-reporting statute without a finding that the losing party acted frivolously or in bad faith.
- A Rule 59(e) motion cannot be used to present arguments or legal theories that could and should have been raised before judgment.
- Fee objections may be forfeited when they are not timely presented to the magistrate judge or district court, including an objection that an award exceeds the amount requested.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the financial risk of adding Texas statutory credit-reporting claims to litigation: the state-law fee provision applies to prevailing parties without the FCRA’s bad-faith threshold. It also illustrates the importance of preserving every objection to a fee request at the earliest opportunity.
Notably, the Fifth Circuit did not decide on the merits whether awarding more than the requested amount was permissible. It declined to consider that argument because Gore had forfeited it.