Charles Steven Chauncy v. Dennis Lee Gorden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION CHARLES STEVEN CHAUNCY, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 6:24-cv-00573-RBD-NWH DENNIS LEE GORDEN, Defendant. /

ORDER This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein: MOTION: Renewed Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. 71) FILED: August 27, 2025 THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED without prejudice. To the extent necessary, Defendant may file a renewed motion for attorney’s fees within fourteen (14) days of the conclusion of the appeal in this matter.

Defendant seeks an award of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 768.79 after obtaining a judgment in his favor (Doc. 61) and after Plaintiff’s Motion to Alter that Judgment was denied (Doc. 70). Plaintiff appealed the order granting summary judgment and the order denying his motion to alter judgment. (Doc. 73).

Given the pending appeal, Plaintiff argues that the Court should deny the Motion without prejudice until the conclusion of the appeal. (Doc. 72). “[D]eferring ruling on a motion for attorney’s fees and costs pending an appeal is a matter within the court’s discretion, and courts will defer ruling in the interests of judicial economy.” Truesdell v. Thomas, Case No: 5:13-cv-552-Oc-10PRL, 2016 WL 7049252, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 5, 2016) (citations omitted); see also Pub.

Risk Mgmt. of Fla. v. Munich Reinsurance Am., Inc., No. 8:18-CV-1449-MSS-AEP, 2021 WL 4393291, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 9, 2021). Courts in this district commonly deny such motions without prejudice with leave to renew or supplement the motion after resolution of the appeal. Pub. Risk Mgmt. of Fla. v. Munich Reinsurance Am., Inc., No. 8:18-CV-1449-MSS-AEP, 2021 WL 4393291, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 9, 2021) (citing Regions Bank v. Legal Outsource PA, Civ. No. 2:14-476-FtM-PAM-MRM, 2017 WL 11461033, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2017) (“This Court’s practice is to deny motions for attorney’s fees without prejudice when a matter has been appealed.”)).

In this case, that resolution seems most likely to preserve judicial resources, prevent piecemeal litigation of the issue of an award of attorneys’ fees and costs, and promote the interests of efficiency and economy. See Corey Airport Servs., Inc. v. City of Atlanta, Civil Action No. 1:04-CV-3243-CAP, 2011 WL 13216938, at *1 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 6, 2011) (agreeing that it would be an inefficient use of limited judicial resources to address the motion for attorney’s fees with an appeal pending).

DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on January 30, 2026.

NATHAN W. HILL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties