Opinion ID: 788946
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Supplemental Attorneys' Fees Awarded Post-Trial

Text: 49 Supplemental attorneys' fees can be awarded in the same manner as attorneys' fees. See Brock v. UAW, 1991 WL 124924 (6th Cir. July 10, 1991) (permitting supplemental fees for additional work completed after initial award). In such cases, this court has found that [t]he trial judge in determining the value of services rendered by lawyers who have tried a case before him ordinarily has an infinitely better opportunity to evaluate those services than does an appellate court. Id. at  (citing Ramey v. Cincinnati Enquirer, 508 F.2d 1188, 1196 (6th Cir.1974)). 50 In its separate appeal of the district court's award of supplemental attorneys' fees, Meijer argues that McCombs's counsel should not be compensated for unsuccessful and unnecessary post-trial discovery, for the entirety of work in attempting to recover attorneys' fees from trial verdict, and at such an excessive rate. The district court articulated valid reasons for each of its decisions regarding these arguments. Specifically, the post-trial discovery related to attorneys' fees and costs resulted in an award totaling over $460,000. The attorneys' work, therefore, was not unsuccessful as Meijer would have this court believe. The post-trial work included McCombs successfully defending Meijer's motion for judgment on the pleadings and motion for a new trial. Last, the district court refers to the analysis in its earlier order regarding the attorney's hourly rate of $175, which we have already indicated is an acceptable rate in this case. For these reasons, we do not find that the district court abused its discretion in awarding supplemental attorneys' fees.