As NewsBusters was first to report back in August, Judge William Scott Henry of Florida’s 14th Judicial Circuit ruled against Navy veteran Zachary Young and granted two motions to dismiss on a pair of defamation suits against The Associated Press and Puck News. While Young’s appeals made their way through the legal system, the AP filed a motion requesting the court have Young fork up $239,545.50 for “reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.”

The AP’s lead counsel Charles Tobin of Ballard Spahr LLP, requested the court award his client that large sum via Florida’s anti-SLAPP Act:

Defendant The Associated Press (“The AP”) respectfully submits this Motion for Attorney’s Fees pursuant to the Florida Anti-SLAPP Act, Fla. Stat. § 768.295, and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.525.1 As the Court held in its August 28, 2025 order dismissing this case (“Anti-SLAPP Order”), The AP is the “prevailing party” under the Anti-SLAPP statute and, accordingly, is “entitled to recover from Plaintiffs its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.” Anti-SLAPP Order at 16. The AP now seeks an award of $239.545.50 in fees.

According to Cornell Law School, “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP suit) refers to lawsuits brought by individuals and entities to dissuade their critics from continuing to produce negative publicity. By definition, SLAPP suits do not have any true legal claims against the critics.” Essentially, anti-SLAPP laws were meant to be a way to recoup costs.

In the filing, the AP seemed to take issue with how “Young litigated the case very aggressively” (emphasis theirs) and his seeking $453 million in total damages. They even cited NewsBusters reporting on the amount.

Apparently, that nearly $240,000 price tag included a discounted billing rate for services rendered between May and August of 2025. “As a courtesy to The AP and based on its longstanding relationship with Ballard Spahr, extended a substantial discount to The AP for its representation in this matter,” Tobin explained. The discounts for their billing hours ranged from nearly 25 percent for paralegals on the case to roughly 38 percent for Tobin’s, as shown in a graph.

“In all, the AP is seeking compensation for 392.7 hours in attorney and paralegal time. Based on counsel’s rates, those 396.4 hours correspond $239,545.50 in fees,” Tobin continued. According to another graph in the filing, Tobin would be making $73,008 from the AP and his co-counsel Paul Safier raked in $123,879.

The AP also tried to argue that they were being reasonable by not seeking full compensation for what they spent on the case:

Those invoices show both the total amount in attorney hours for which The AP is seeking compensation and the work descriptions tied to those hours. The invoices do not include the amounts in attorney and paralegal time that were written off in the exercise of its billing judgment and that were not included in statements for services rendered. Id. In addition, so as to ensure that the amount sought by its Motion for Attorney’s Fees is as reasonable as possible, The AP has also elected to exclude certain additional fees for which it was billed and for which it approved for payment to Ballard Spahr. By way of example, The AP is not seeking compensation for attorney time spent on affirmative discovery requests that were not served or exploration of potential experts.

“In sum, counsel charged a reasonable rate and billed a reasonable number of hours to prevail in this action. The AP should be fully compensated for the fees Young’s meritless action caused it to incur, as Florida law directs,” the filing argued.

Again, the AP was requesting Young pay their costs before the Florida appeals court even heard Young’s motion to take another look.