United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
PHARMERICA DRUG SYSTEMS, LLC, d/b/a PHARMERICA and PHARMERICA CORPORATION d/b/a PHARMERICA, Plaintiffs,
MAGNUM HEALTH AND REHAB OF MONROE, LLC, d/b/a MAGNUMCARE OF MONROE, LLC, et al., Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN
PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES
STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
September 28 and 29, 2017, the Clerk of Court entered default
judgment against Defendants. ECF 41-45, 47. On October 25,
2017, pursuant to Civil Rule 54(d)(2), Plaintiffs filed a
timely motion for attorney's fees and costs. ECF 48; E.D.
Mich. LR 54.1.2(a). Plaintiffs seek $47, 437.50 in
attorney's fees and $2, 061.39 in costs. ECF 48, PgID
233. Defendants had fourteen days to object to the request;
they did not. E.D. Mich. LR 54.1.2(b). For the reasons below,
the Court will grant the motion.
provides goods and services to nursing facilities. On March
15, 2012, PharMerica entered into a services agreement
("2012 Agreement") with Defendants Magnum Health
and Rehab centers in Monroe ("Monroe"), Saginaw
("Saginaw"), Adrian ("Adrian"), and
Hastings ("Hastings") (collectively "Facility
Defendants"). ECF 1-1, PgID 37. Defendants Beyond
Healthcare, LLC and Beyond Healthcare Management, LLC control
the Facility Defendants (collectively
September 2014, PharMerica retained Fultz Maddox Dickens PLC
("FMD") to address Defendants' defaulted
payments. FMD sent demand letters to Defendants.
Defendants' attorney negotiated with FMD to settle
Defendants' outstanding debt and Defendants ultimately
made payments exceeding $610, 000. But Defendants still owed
October and December 2015, and May 2016, PharMerica and
Defendants entered into new contracts ("2015
Agreements"). See ECF 1-1, PgID 50, 73, 98, and 119.
August 1, 2017, PharMerica filed its complaint seeking $598,
234.50 in delinquent payments. At the end of September 2017,
the Court entered default judgment against the Defendants.
The Court must determine whether the Agreements entitle
PharMerica to an award of reasonable attorney's fees.
United States, parties ordinarily bear their own
attorney's fees absent explicit statutory authority or an
enforceable contract allocating attorney's fees.
Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of Am. v. Pac. Gas &
Elec. Co., 549 U.S. 443, 448 (2007). When considering an
award of attorney's fees in a diversity action, the Court
must apply state substantive law and federal procedural law.
Hunt v. Hadden, 159 F.Supp.3d 800, 805 (E.D. Mich.
2016) (collecting cases).
Court must first determine whether the 2012 Agreement
entitles PharMerica to attorney's fees for any action
taken by its attorneys before the effective dates of the 2015
Agreements. It does not.
of the 2012 Agreement's choice-of-law provision, the
Court analyzes the question pursuant to Florida law. See ECF
1-1, PgID 35, § 14.11. In general, Florida law allows
contract provisions requiring payment of ...