The opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
J. P., as parent and next )
friend of A.W., a minor, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) CIVIL ACTION NO.
v. ) 2:19cv636-MHT
) (WO)
ELMORE COUNTY BOARD OF )
EDUCATION, )
)
Defendant. )
ORDER
In the court’s opinion and order granting in part
plaintiff J.P.’s motion for summary judgment on a claim
for attorneys’ fees, count II of her amended complaint
(Doc. 6), the court instructed J.P. to file a
“clarification of the total number of hours requested
and total fee sought for the work of attorney Henry L.
Cassady, Jr.,” one of J.P.’s two attorneys, “on each of
the special education cases” underlying her claim for
attorneys’ fees. J. P. v. Elmore County Board of
Education, 2:19Ccv636-MHT, 2021 WL 1270463, at *6 (M.D.
Ala. Apr. 6, 2021). In response, in addition to the
clarification sought by the court, both Cassady and
J.P.’s second attorney William Johnson III filed
declarations requesting fees for litigating the
attorneys’ fees claim. See Supplemental Decl. of Henry
L. Cassady, Jr. (Doc. 73); Third Decl. of William
Tipton Johnson III (Doc. 72).
Defendant Elmore County Board of Education has
objected to both declarations and the fees requested
therein. See Objection (Doc. 74). This objection will
be sustained, and the court will not currently consider
the requests of Cassady and Johnson for fees for
litigating count II of J.P.’s amended complaint, that
is, fees for litigating fees. First, until the court
determines what fees are appropriate under count II for
time spent litigating the underlying due-process
proceedings, the court will not be able to assess the
degree of counsel’s success on that claim. And,
second, Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure requires that a “claim for attorney’s fees
2
and related nontaxable expenses must be made by
motion,” which must “be filed no later than 14 days
after the entry of judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(d)(2)(A), (B)(i).
Therefore, and in the interest of efficiency, the
court will not consider requests for fees for
litigating either count of J.P.’s complaint until her
complaint is resolved in full. Once final judgment is
entered in this suit, J.P. may move for fees for the
time spent litigating this case to the extent that she
is the prevailing party in the litigation.
***
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
(1) Defendant Elmore County Board of Education’s
objection to the declarations of attorneys Cassady and
Johnson (Doc. 74) is sustained, except that the court
will consider attorney Cassady’s declaration to the
extent that it is responsive to the court’s request for
clarification in its prior opinion and order (Doc. 66).
3
(2) Defendant Elmore County Board of Education’s
deadline to respond to attorney Cassady’s
clarification, previously set for April 23, 2021, see
Opinion and Order (Doc. 66) at 25, is extended to 5:00
p.m. on April 26, 2021. This response should not
address the objected-to declarations of attorneys
Cassady and Johnson, except attorney Cassady’s to the
extent that it is responsive to the court’s request for
clarification.
(3) Plaintiff J.P.’s deadline to reply to defendant
Elmore County Board of Education’s response is extended
to 5:00 p.m. on April 30, 2021.
Counsel for the parties were orally informed of the
extensions on April 23, 2021.
DONE, this the 26th day of April, 2021.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4