Opinion
Civil Action No. 00-1468 Section "K"(2).
May 14, 2001
MINUTE ENTRY
Before the Court is the motion of defendants Sgt. Christine Moses, Sgt. Master Wilton Lebo, and Lt. Donnie Seal ("defendants") to strike plaintiff Steven Gallagher's prayer for attorney fees (doc.47). The motion was set for hearing on May 9, 2001 and no opposition was filed by plaintiff. The Court has considered defendants' motion and the relevant law and finds that the motion has merit and shall be granted for the following reasons.
Plaintiff Gallagher is an inmate housed at the Washington Correctional Institute who filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming injuries from allegedly nefarious treatment received at his place of detention. Among other damages, plaintiff alleges that he is entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, which provides in pertinent part,
In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title DC of Public Law 92-318 [ 20 U.S.C.A. § 1681 et seq.], the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 [ 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000bb et seq.], the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 [ 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000cc et seq.], title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [ 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000d et seq.], or section 13981 of this title, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorneys fee as part of the costs . . .42 U.S.C. § 1988(b).
Nevertheless, it is well established that pro se litigants are not permitted to recover attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Kay v. Ehrler, 499 U.S. 432, 435, 111 S.Ct. 1435, 1436-37 (1991) (a pro se litigant is not entitled to attorney's fees under section 1988, regardless of whether the pro se litigant is himself an attorney);Cofield v. Atlanta, 648 F.2d 986, 987-88 (5th Cir. 1981) (Civil Rights Fee Awards Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1988, does not contemplate awarding attorney's fees to pro se litigants); Thomas v. Sawyer, 1999 WL 155704 (N.D.Tex. 3/11/1999) (pro se prisoners cannot receive section 1988 attorney fees as a matter of law); Prewitt v. Alexander, 173 F.R.D. 438, 440 (N.D. Miss. 1996) (fee shifting provision does not apply to pro se litigants).
Thus, it is clear that, as a matter of law, this pro se plaintiff cannot recover attorney fees, even were he to prevail in the underlying matter. It is therefore appropriate for the Court to grant defendants motion. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that defendants motion to strike plaintiffs prayer for attorney fees is GRANTED.