Southern-Owners Insurance Company v. Wall 2 Walls Construction, LLC et al
Filing
45
ORDER: Defendant Wall 2 Walls' Motion to Determine Entitlement to Attorneys' Fees and Taxable Costs, Request for Order Determining Procedure to Determine Amount, or in the Alternative, Motion for Extension of Time to File Affidavits and Documents in Support of Reasonable Fees and Taxable Costs 39 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 12/31/2013. (KAK)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
SOUTHERN-OWNERS INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No.
8:12-cv-1922-T-33TBM
WALL 2 WALLS CONSTRUCTION, LLC,
ET AL.,
Defendants.
________________________________/
ORDER
This cause is before the Court pursuant to Defendant Wall
2 Walls’ Motion to Determine Entitlement to Attorneys’ Fees
and Taxable Costs, Request for Order Determining Procedure to
Determine Amount, or in the Alternative, Motion for Extension
of Time to File Affidavits and Documents in Support of
Reasonable Fees and Taxable Costs (Doc. # 39), which was filed
on December 16, 2013. For the reasons that follow, this Court
denies the Motion without prejudice.
Discussion
In an Order dated November 26, 2013, the Court granted
summary judgment in favor of Wall 2 Walls and against Southern
Owners. (Doc. # 37).
The Court’s Judgment was entered on
November 27, 2013. (Doc. # 38).
On December 16, 2013, Wall 2
Walls filed the instant Motion requesting attorneys’ fees in
the amount of $119,700 and costs in the amount of $843.11.
(Doc. # 39).
Southern Owners filed a Notice of Appeal of the
Court’s Judgment on December 24, 2013. (Doc. # 40).
As a general rule, the filing of a notice of appeal
divests a district court of jurisdiction with respect to any
matter involved in the appeal. In Green Leaf Nursery v. E.I.
DuPont de Nemours & Co., 341 F.3d 1292, 1309 (11th Cir. 2003),
the Eleventh Circuit explained: “The filing of an appeal is an
event of jurisdictional significance–-it confers jurisdiction
on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its
control over those aspects of the case involved in the
appeal.” (Internal citations omitted). However, the Court has
discretion to deny a motion for attorneys’ fees without
prejudice
with
leave
to
re-file
after
concluded. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d).
the
appeal
has
The Advisory Committee
Notes to Rule 54(d)(2) explain: “If an appeal on the merits of
the case is taken, the 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
Advisory
Committee
Notes
to
the
1993
amendment
to
Rule
54(d)(2).
Rather than resolving the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees
during the pendency of the appeal, the Court determines that
-2-
Copies to: All counsel of record
-4-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?