Bush v. City of Prineville

Full title: Eric C. BUSH, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PRINEVILLE, a…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

Date published: Jan 8, 2020

301 Or. App. 697 (Or. Ct. App. 2020)

456 P.3d 334

Opinion

A167442

01-08-2020

Eric C. BUSH, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PRINEVILLE, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon; League of Oregon Cities and Association of Oregon Counties, dba Local Government Personnel Institute; and Michael Boyd, an individual, Defendants-Respondents.

R. Kyle Busse argued the cause for appellant. Also on the briefs were Busse & Hunt, Roxanne L. Farra, and Roxanne L. Farra, P.C. Janet M. Schroer, Portland, argued the cause for respondents. Also on the joint brief were Lindsay H. Duncan, Hart Wagner LLP, Robert E. Franz, Jr., and Law Office of Robert E. Franz, Jr.

PER CURIAM.

R. Kyle Busse argued the cause for appellant. Also on the briefs were Busse & Hunt, Roxanne L. Farra, and Roxanne L. Farra, P.C.

Janet M. Schroer, Portland, argued the cause for respondents. Also on the joint brief were Lindsay H. Duncan, Hart Wagner LLP, Robert E. Franz, Jr., and Law Office of Robert E. Franz, Jr.

Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Shorr, Judge.

PER CURIAM This is the second of two related appeals concerning attorney fees. In Bush v. City of Prineville , 301 Or. App. 674, ––– P.3d –––– (2020) ( Bush I ), we held that the trial court erred in concluding that plaintiff’s acceptance of defendants’ offers of judgment and corresponding stipulated judgments entitled plaintiff to attorney fees on all of his claims. Accordingly, we reversed the supplemental judgment awarding plaintiff attorney fees, and we remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

After the trial court awarded fees in Bush I , plaintiff submitted a supplemental statement of attorney fees for fees incurred in filing its attorney fee petition in Bush I (so-called fees on fees). The trial court denied plaintiff’s supplemental request for attorney fees, because it ruled that plaintiff’s request was untimely. The court entered a second supplemental judgment denying plaintiff’s fees on fees request. In this case (Bush II ), plaintiff appeals that supplemental judgment. Because we reversed and remanded the supplemental judgment awarding fees in Bush I , there will be ongoing litigation on the various fee issues. It is therefore appropriate to reverse the second supplemental judgment and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.