Lange v. Anchor Glass Container Corp.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana addresses post-trial motions in a Title VII race-discrimination action brought by Cory B. Lange against Anchor Glass Container Corporation. The court partially grants Anchor Glass’s motion for leave to file a surreply, grants Lange’s bill of costs and motion for attorney fees, denies Anchor Glass’s motion to extend the stay of execution, and sets an appeal bond at $744,282.74.

Holdings

1. Leave to file a surreply was warranted only to the extent Section B addressed new evidence raised in Lange's reply; Section A was denied because it merely rehashed an argument already presented in Anchor Glass's response.
2. As the prevailing plaintiff in a Title VII action, Lange was entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees, expenses, and costs, and the court awarded $426,282.74.
3. Lange's abandonment of reinstatement, back pay, and front pay did not require a reduction in attorney fees, expenses, or costs.
4. The challenged billing entries and fees for local counsel were sufficiently reasonable and documented to support recovery; the court declined to deduct fees for alleged clerical, duplicative, vague, block-billed, or quarter-hour entries.
5. Anchor Glass was not entitled to another extension of the stay of execution.
6. The court set an appeal bond of $744,282.74, consisting of $318,000 for the damages award and $426,282.74 for fees, expenses, and costs, and declined to impose a separate bond for anticipated appellate fees and costs under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 7.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Anchor Glass should receive leave to file a surreply addressing new evidence raised in Lange's reply.
2. Whether Lange was entitled to recover the requested attorney fees, expenses, and costs under Rule 54(d)(1) and Title VII's fee-shifting provision.
3. Whether fees should be reduced because Lange abandoned claims for reinstatement, back pay, and front pay or because counsel's hours and billing entries were allegedly excessive, clerical, duplicative, vague, or block-billed.
4. Whether the court should further extend the stay of execution pending appeal.
5. What amount of appeal bond was appropriate to secure the damages, fees, expenses, and costs award.

Disposition

other