3 places the award of reasonable attorney fees within the discretion of the court.
Hadix v. Johnson
, 65 F.3d 532 (6th Cir. 1995).
However, motions for attorneys’ fees are commonly
stayed when the underlying action is appealed, to promote judicial economy.
54(d), Advisory Committee's Note (1993 amendments) (“If an appeal on the merits
of the case is taken, the [district] court may rule on the claim for fees, may defer its ruling on the motion, or may deny the motion without prejudice, directing under subdivision (d)(2)(B) a new period for
filing after the appeal has been resolved.”);
see also Tancredi v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
, 378 F.3d 220, 225
26 (2d Cir.2004);
see also Michigan Bldg. & Const. Trades Council, AFL-CIO v. Snyder,
11-13520, 2012 WL 1893516 at *2 (E.D. Mich. May 23, 2012). While the Attorney General is not appeali
ng the instant case, it appears that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees would be moot if the Governor, who is appealing, were
successful on appeal in a higher court
. As such, and considering this Court’s continuing jurisdiction over the
issue of attor
neys’ fees, holding the Motion in abeyance would avoid the potential problem of recovery of awarded attorneys’ fees
, without prejudicing the Plaintiffs.
Were the Court not inclined to hold the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees in
abeyance, the fees s
ubmitted by Plaintiffs’ counsel should be reduced for time associated with
media interaction and strategy. Dan Canon, for example, submitted bills of 21 hours for media-related work. [Doc. No. 60-3]. It is axiomatic that litigation goals are achieved in court and
attorneys’ fees should not be obtained for media appearances.
See Gratz v.
Bollinger, 353 F. Supp. 2d 929 (E.D. Mich. 2005). Furthermore, Mr. Canon has claimed 10.3 hours for time spent working on the
Love v. Beshear
case, which is not final. Because Plaintiffs have not prevailed in
that case, and the Attorney General has been dismissed from the case, such attorneys’ fees
cannot be obtained against him.
Case 3:13-cv-00750-JGH Document 75 Filed 04/04/14 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 1047