Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_02-cv-00494/USCOURTS-azd-2_02-cv-00494-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Vernon Harris, 

Plaintiff, 

v.

Superior Court of the State of Arizona in

and for the County of Maricopa; the

Supreme Court of Arizona; and the State

of Arizona,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-02-494-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Defendants’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Related

Non-Taxable Costs (Dkt. 336) and Motion for Summary Disposition Re: Motion for

Attorneys’ Fees (Dkt. 352). Also pending are Plaintiff’s Motion for Stay and Bifurcation of

Proceedings Regarding Defendants’ Attorneys’ Fees Request and Motion for Additional Time

to Respond to Defendants’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for

Attorneys’ Fees and Related Non-Taxable Costs (Dkt. 359) and Motion to Expedite Decision

on Motion for Stay and Bifurcation of Defendants’ Attorneys’ Fees Request and Motion for

Additional Time to Respond to Defendants’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in

Support of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Related Non-Taxable Costs (Dkt. 360). 

Defendants request an award of $302,081.15 in attorneys’ fees and expenses (and

$21,279.22 in related non-taxable costs), pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 12-341.01(a), which

permits a court to award reasonable attorneys’ fees to a prevailing party in any contract action,

Case 2:02-cv-00494-SMM Document 364 Filed 10/20/06 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

and 42 U.S.C. § 1988, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k), and Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 41-1481(J), which

permit a court to award attorneys’ fees to a prevailing party for claims that are frivolous,

unreasonable, and without foundation. Because the Court granted summary judgment in

favor of Defendants on each of Plaintiff’s ten claims (Dkt. 332), among other reasons,

Defendants argue they are entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and related non-taxable

costs. (Dkts. 336, 352.) 

After Defendants moved for attorneys’ fees, Plaintiff appealed the Court’s Order

granting summary judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

(Dkt. 342.)

In light of Plaintiff’s appeal, the Court finds that it would be imprudent to resolve

Defendants’ pending motions pertaining to an award of attorneys’ fees and related nontaxable costs. Consequently, the Court will deny Defendants’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees

and Related Non-Taxable Costs (dkt. 336) without prejudice and with leave to re-file upon

the Ninth Circuit’s resolution of Plaintiff’s appeal. 

Similarly, in light of Plaintiff’s appeal, the Court finds that it would be imprudent to

resolve Plaintiff’s pending motions pertaining to the method by which the attorneys’ fees

issue will be resolved. Consequently, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Stay and

Bifurcation of Proceedings Regarding Defendants’ Attorneys’ Fees Request and Motion for

Additional Time to Respond to Defendants’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in

Support of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Related Non-Taxable Costs (Dkt. 359). 

Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendants’

Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Related Non-Taxable Costs (Dkt. 336). Defendants may refile their Motion for Attorneys’ Fees upon resolution of Plaintiff’s appeal by the United

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING AS MOOT Defendants’ Motion for

Summary Disposition Re: Motion for Attorneys’ Fees. (Dkt. 352.)

Case 2:02-cv-00494-SMM Document 364 Filed 10/20/06 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s

Motion for Stay and Bifurcation of Proceedings Regarding Defendants’ Attorneys’ Fees

Request and Motion for Additional Time to Respond to Defendants’ Memorandum of Points

and Authorities in Support of Motion for Attorneys Fees’ and Related Non-Taxable Costs

(Dkt. 359.)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING AS MOOT Plaintiff’s Motion to

Expedite Decision on Motion for Stay and Bifurcation of Defendants’ Attorneys’ Fees

Request and Motion for Additional Time to Respond to Defendants’ Memorandum of Points

and Authorities in Support of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Related Non-Taxable Costs.

 (Dkt. 360.) 

DATED this 19th day of October, 2006.

Case 2:02-cv-00494-SMM Document 364 Filed 10/20/06 Page 3 of 3