Dist.Ct. did not err in imposing sanctions in amount of $271, 926.92 for defendants’ costs and fees spent in defending instant action seeking royalties under withdrawal agreement, under circumstances where various arbitrators had previously found that third-party alone was responsible for said royalties. Dist. Ct. could properly find that prior arbitration holdings were binding and final on plaintiffs, given fact that withdrawal agreement required that all disputes be submitted to arbitration and that instant lawsuit was premised on same foundational issues previously decided in arbitrations. Moreover, sanctions were proper, where instant lawsuit was precluded, and language in withdrawal agreement rendered instant lawsuit frivolous. Also, amount of sanctions was reasonable, where: (1) although hourly fees of defendant’s counsel, i.e., $973 and $1,092, were above median rate, record showed that counsel’s clients actually paid them; and (2) plaintiffs failed to overcome presumption that amount of time spent on matter was reasonable, where defendants actually paid counsel $271,926.92 at issue in instant sanctions order.
