State of Washington v. United States Department of the Navy

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: March 16, 2023
• Docket: 2:19-cv-01059
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES 1

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 STATE OF WASHINGTON 9

Plaintiff, 10 Case No. 19-cv-1059-RAJ v. 11 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 12 THE NAVY, et al., 13 Defendants. 14

I. Introduction 15 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for an interim award of 16 attorneys’ fees and costs. Dkt. # 120. For the reasons below, the motion is DENIED 17 without prejudice. 18 II. Background 19 Plaintiff Citizens of Ebey’s Reserve (COER) moves for an interim award of 20 attorneys’ fees and expert costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54. COER seeks an interim 21 award of attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act as the prevailing party 22 given the Court’s August 2, 2022 Order Adopting Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 23 119). Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), plaintiffs are entitled to an award 24 of attorneys’ fees and costs as a prevailing party against the United States. See Love v. 25 Reilly, 924 F.2d 1492, 1495 (9th Cir. 1991) (stating that “an award of fees is mandatory 26 under the EAJA unless the government’s position is substantially justified or special 27 circumstances exist that make an award of fees unjust”). 1 III. Legal Standard 2 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54 outlines the basic procedures for requesting 3 attorneys’ fees. A claim for attorney’s fees and related nontaxable expenses must be 4 made by motion unless the substantive law requires those fees to be proved at trial as an 5 element of damages. Fed. R. Civ. P 54(d)(2)(A). Unless a statute or a court order 6 provides otherwise, the motion must be filed no later than 14 days after the entry of 7 judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P 54(d)(2)(B). The EAJA requires that a party seeking attorneys’ 8 fees must submit an application to the court “within thirty days of final judgment in the 9 action.” 28 U.S.C. § 2413(d)(1)(B) (1988). 10 IV. Discussion 11 COER argues that it prevailed on its claim challenging the adequacy of the EIS. 12 Dkt. # 120 at 2. According to COER, because it achieved the principal ruling it sought in 13 bringing this lawsuit, it argues that it is a prevailing party under EAJA. Id. 14 Federal Defendants argue that Plaintiff’s request for attorneys’ fees is premature 15 because a request for fees is allowed only after a final, non-appealable judgment. The 16 EAJA requires that a party seeking attorneys’ fees must submit an application to the court 17 “within thirty days of final judgment in the action.” 28 U.S.C. § 2413(d)(1)(B) (1988). 18 Congress defined “final judgment” as one that is “final and not appealable.” 28 U.S.C. § 19 2421(d)(2)(G) (1988). Furthermore, even when the Court enters an order constituting a 20 “judgment” for purposes of the FRCP and EAJA, if Federal Defendants choose to appeal 21 that order it will remain non-final until the appeal is resolved. See 28 U.S.C. § 22 2412(d)(2)(G). Federal Defendants add that the remedy related to the Court’s order has 23 not yet been decided, and accordingly, they cannot evaluate the strength of COER’s 24 claim for fees. Dkt. # 123 at 3. 25 The Court agrees with the Federal Defendants that it should defer the attorneys’ 26 fees decision until final judgment to promote judicial efficiency. First, Federal 27 Defendants are correct that final judgment has not been entered. Second, since the 1 “degree of success obtained” still depends on the remedy achieved and the outcome of 2 any appeal, the Court cannot yet fully determine Plaintiff’s success in this litigation. 3 Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433 (1983). Ultimately, without complete 4 information on Plaintiff's success, the Court cannot undertake a proper attorneys’ fees 5 analysis. 6 Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees without 7 prejudice. 8 V. Conclusion 9 For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ 10 fees without prejudice. Dkt. # 120. This motion may be renewed when final judgment is 11 entered. 12

13 DATED this 16th day of March, 2023. 14 A 15 16 The Honorable Richard A. Jones 17 United States District Judge 18

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27