Rule 54 - Judgments; Attorney Fees(a)Definition; Form. "Judgment" as used in these rules includes a decree and any order from which an appeal lies. A judgment should not include recitals of pleadings, a master's report, or a record of prior proceedings.(b)Judgment on Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple Parties. When an action presents more than one claim for relief-whether as a claim, counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim-or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims or parties only if the court expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay. Otherwise, any order or other decision, however designated, that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not end the action as to any of the claims or parties and may be revised at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all the claims and all the parties' rights and liabilities.(c)Demand for Judgment; Relief to Be Granted. A default judgment must not differ in kind from, or exceed in amount, what is demanded in the pleadings, except that if the prayer is for unspecified damages under Rule 8(a)(4), the court must determine the amount of the judgment. Every other final judgment should grant the relief to which each party is entitled, even if the party has not demanded such relief in its pleadings.(d)Attorney Fees.(2)Attorney Fees.(A)Claim to Be by Motion. A claim for attorney fees must be made by motion. The court may decide a postjudgment motion for attorney fees despite the existence of a pending appeal from the underlying final judgment.(B)Timing and Contents of the Motion. Unless a statute or a court order provides otherwise, the motion must: (i) be filed no later than 21 days after written notice of entry of judgment is served;(ii) specify the judgment and the statute, rule, or other grounds entitling the movant to the award;(iii) state the amount sought or provide a fair estimate of it;(iv) disclose, if the court so orders, the nonprivileged financial terms of any agreement about fees for the services for which the claim is made; and(v) be supported by: (a) counsel's affidavit swearing that the fees were actually and necessarily incurred and were reasonable;(b) documentation concerning the amount of fees claimed; and(c) points and authorities addressing the appropriate factors to be considered by the court in deciding the motion.(C)Extensions of Time. The court may not extend the time for filing the motion after the time has expired.(D)Exceptions. Rules 54(d)(2)(A) and (B) do not apply to claims for attorney fees as sanctions or when the applicable substantive law requires attorney fees to be proved at trial as an element of damages.Last amended effective 5/1/2009; amended effective 3/1/2019.Advisory Committee Note 2019 Amendment Subsection (b). From 2004 to 2019, NRCP 54(b) departed from FRCP 54(b), only permitting certification of a judgment to allow an interlocutory appeal if it eliminated one or more parties, not one or more claims. The 2019 amendments add the reference to claims back into the rule, restoring the district court's authority to direct entry of final judgment when one or more, but fewer than all, claims are resolved. The court has discretion in deciding whether to grant Rule 54(b) certification; given the strong policy against piecemeal review, an order granting Rule 54(b) certification should detail the facts and reasoning that make interlocutory review appropriate. An appellate court may review whether a judgment was properly certified under this rule.
Subsection (d). Rule 54(d)(2)(B)(iv) is new. While drawn from the federal rule, it limits the required disclosure about the agreement for services to nonprivileged financial terms.
Drafter's Note
2004 Amendment
Subdivision (b) is amended to omit any mention of claims. Under the revised rule, the court can no longer direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims in a multiple-claim case. Thus, an order adjudicating one or more but fewer than all of the claims in a multiple-claim case is not a final judgment and is not appealable. The revised rule retains language permitting the court to direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the parties involved in a case.