WOLSKI v. CITY OF ERIE

Filing 62

ORDER: AND NOW, to wit, this 3rd Day of August, 2012, the Plaintiff having filed a motion for attorney fees 51 in the above-captioned matter, and it appearing that said motion is premature in light of the Defendant's pending motion 50 for j udgment as a matter of law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) and/or for a new trial under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59, IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's motion for attorney fees 51 shall be, and hereby is, DENIED without prejudice to be reasserted within fourteen (14) days following entry of this Court's order adjudicating the Defendant's post-trial motions. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 08/03/2012. (kas)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MARY WOLSKI,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE CITY OF ERIE,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:08-cv-289

ORDER
AND NOW, to wit, this 3rd Day of August, 2012, the Plaintiff having filed a motion
for attorney fees [51] in the above-captioned matter, and it appearing that said motion is
premature in light of the Defendant’s pending motion [50] for judgment as a matter of
law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) and/or for a new trial under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59,1
IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees [51] shall be, and
hereby is, DENIED without prejudice to be reasserted within fourteen (14) days
following entry of this Court’s order adjudicating the Defendant’s post-trial motions.
s/

Sean J. McLaughlin
SEAN J. McLAUGHLIN
United States District Judge

Cm:

All counsel of record.
1

See Bailey v. County of Riverside, 414 F.3d 1023, 1024 (9th Cir. 2005)
(requirement under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2)(B) that motion for attorneys’ fees be filed
“no later than 14 days after entry of judgment” is tolled pending the outcome of post-trial
motions under Rule 50 or 59, since those motions suspend finality of the underlying
judgment). Accord Gaskins v. BFI Waste Services, LLC, 281 Fed. Appx. 255, 261 (4th
Cir. 2008); Miltimore Sales, Inc. v. International Rectifier, Inc., 412 F.3d 685, 687 (6th
Cir. 2005); Weyant v. Okst, 198 F.3d 311, 315 (2d Cir. 1999).