The opinion of the court was delivered by: McLAUGHLIN, Sean J., District Judge.
Presently pending before the Court are the following motions filed by Plaintiff, Virginia Kurschinske ("Kurschinske")*fn1
(1) Motion for Interest and Costs [ECF No. 101];
(2) Motion to Nullify the January 19, 2011 Court Order [ECF No. 102]; and
(3) "Motion [for] Court to Warrant Criminal Charges" [ECF No. 108].*fn2
The facts and procedural background of the case are set forth in detail in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated January 19, 2011 and are incorporated herein. [ECF No. 94]. Briefly, on January 28, 2008, following a jury trial on Kurschinske's gender discrimination claim pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 2000c et seq. and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, 43 P.S. § 951 et seq., a judgment was entered in favor of Kurschinske in the amount of $25,000.00 ("Judgment 1"). [ECF No. 53]. Defendant, Meadville Forging Company ("Meadville Forging") paid Kurschinske $25,000.00 on June 27, 2008. On September 30, 2008, this Court awarded attorney's fees and costs in favor of Kurschinske and against Meadville Forging in the amount of $46,763.21 ("Judgment 2"). [ECF No. 63].
On December 2, 2008, Susan Mahood ("Mahood"), Kurschinske's counsel, filed a Petition for Equitable Charging Lien, requesting that this Court impose an equitable charging lien in her favor and order payment of Judgment 2 to her. [ECF No. 65]. A telephonic argument on the Petition was held on January 6, 2009. Mahood contended that she was entitled to the full amount of Judgment 2, i.e., $46,763.21. Kurschinske, on the other hand, argued that Mahood was entitled to a lesser percentage of the fee based upon an alleged contractual agreement with Mahood. At the conclusion of the argument, I dismissed the Petition for lack of jurisdiction. See [ECF No. 93], Tr. of Argument pp. 5-7.
On March 23, 2009, Mahood filed a lawsuit against Kurschinske and Meadville Forging in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, at No. GD 09-4046 (the "state court action"). In this lawsuit, Mahood sought payment of Judgment 2 in the amount of $46,763.21 for work performed by her in the federal gender discrimination case. [ECF No. 74], Def. Ex. B. On July 17, 2009, Mahood entered a default judgment against Meadville Forging in the amount of $46,763.21. On August 25, 2009, Meadville Forging forwarded Mahood a check in that amount which was cashed by her on September 2, 2009. [ECF No. 74], Def. Ex. E.
Kurschinske, through counsel, filed an Amended Answer, New Matter and Counterclaim in the state court action, and alleged, inter alia, that she was entitled to $16,094.53 of the attorney's fee award based upon an alleged contract between herself and Mahood. [ECF No. 74], Def. Ex. C. Following argument on Mahood's preliminary objections to Kurschinske's Counterclaim, the state court granted the preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer by Order dated October 9, 2009 and dismissed Kurschinske's Counterclaim with prejudice. [ECF No. 74], Def. Ex. D. On June 29, 2010, Mahood discontinued the state court action.
On October 5, 2010, Kurschinske filed a Praecipe for Writ of Execution in this Court requesting a Writ of Execution be issued against Meadville Forging [ECF No. 71], and a Writ of Execution was issued by the Deputy Clerk. On October 19, 2010 Meadville Forging filed an Emergency Motion to Strike the Writ of Execution and Deem Judgments Satisfied. [ECF No. 74]. Following a hearing held on December 20, 2010, Meadville Forging's Motion was granted by Memorandum Opinion and Order dated January 19, 2011. [ECF No. 94]. In so doing, I concluded that Judgment 1 had been satisfied based upon Meadville Forging's payment of $25,000.00 to Kurschinske on June 27, 2008, and further ordered Meadville Forging to calculate post-judgment interest pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) from January 28, 2008 to June 26, 2008 and issue Kurschinske a draft in the amount of that interest within ten (10) days of the Order. [ECF No. 94, p. 4]. In addition, I held that Kurschinske was collaterally stopped from prosecuting her claim for a portion of the attorneys fees in this case by attempting to execute on Judgment 2 [ECF No. 94, pp. 9-10], and that Judgment 2 had been satisfied as a result of Meadville Forging's payment of $46,763.21 to Mahood. [ECF No. 94, pp. 4-10].
On January 25, 2011, Kurschinske filed a Motion to Reconsider and Motion to Vacate the Court's Order dated January 19, 2011. [ECF. No. 95]. Kurschinske argued that the default judgment entered against Meadville Forging in the state court action should not collaterally estop her from executing on Judgment 2. Meadville Forging filed a response to Kurschinske's Motion and Kurschinkse filed a reply. [ECF No. 98 and ECF No. 100]. On February 25, 2011, Kurschinske's motion was ...