163 results for 'cat:"Attorney Fees" AND cat:"Contract"'.
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit finds the lower court properly granted judgment in favor of the water filtration business partner on unjust enrichment claims in the amount of $153,000 as to the sale of a warehouse. The court proceeded under the theory that a party need not plead or prove wrongful action if the claim is based on “passive receipt of a benefit that would be unconscionable … to retain.” The argument that the prevailing party must show intentional misconduct fails. Affirmed, and remanded to determine entitlement to attorney fees.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 8, 2023, Case #: 22-20026, Categories: Business Expectancy, attorney Fees, contract
J. Winmill grants in part a company's motion for attorney fees and entry of amended judgment in a contract dispute. The company's "limited success does bear on the reasonableness of its fee request." After reducing the attorney's billed hours in half and deducting travel time, the company is awarded attorney fees and costs of $151,000.
Court: USDC Idaho, Judge: Winmill, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: 1:18cv294, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: attorney Fees, contract
J. Boomgaarden finds that the lower court ruled properly in part in a dispute over a noncompete provision in an employment contract. While the lower court went beyond its discretion by awarding attorney fees without a proper explanation, the lower court properly found that the noncompete provision should be voided as a matter of public policy. Affirmed in part.
Court: Wyoming Supreme Court, Judge: Boomgaarden, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: S-22-0238, Categories: Employment, attorney Fees, contract
J. Soto finds a lower court erred in a convoluted dispute between representatives of a personal estate and a “long-term friend and legal advisor” of that deceased person. The estate had sued the friend to collect on a promissory note and the friend then countersued alleging unpaid legal fees and won at lower court. In determining the amounts owed to parties, the lower court failed to adequately consider interest that continued to accrue on the promissory note. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Soto, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: 08-22-00092-CV, Categories: attorney Fees, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Kinsley finds the trial court properly dismissed the Texas law firm's complaint for a share of attorney fees for referral services. The draft agreement and emails sent to the Ohio firm that represented the client, which failed to include any fee percentage or specific terms, did not constitute an oral contract. Additionally, the attorney at the Ohio firm never agreed to the vague terms set forth in the emails and, in fact, rejected the offer several months later, all of which supports the lower court's decision to dismiss the case. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Kinsley, Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-1728, Categories: Fraud, attorney Fees, contract
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly found for the plaintiff law office in a dispute over unpaid referral fees pursuant to the parties' fee-sharing agreement. Even if the plaintiffs' bill of particulars was inadequate, defendants cannot show that these failures were willful or contumacious.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 02763, Categories: attorney Fees, contract
J. Copperhite recommends an award for attorney fees and costs for over $1 million to one law firm after a second firm failed to provide evidence of expenditures related to a contract between the two. The first firm referred asbestos litigation clients to the second, and the parties agreed to share the awards from settlements. However, the second firm did not share any monies from 2,174 settlements.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Copperhite, Filed On: May 22, 2023, Case #: 1:17cv2972, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Settlements, attorney Fees, contract
J. Jenkins finds that the trial court should not have awarded attorney fees and costs to a landowner on a claim for environmental and private damages after the oil company entered a limited admission of liability as to three of the four tracts of land. The landowner should not have been awarded fees and costs for work performed in pursuit of its unsuccessful private damages claims at trial and for work outside the scope of Act 312. The date the trial began through the last date included in the submitted billing records must be excluded from the total award. Reversed in part.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Jenkins , Filed On: May 22, 2023, Case #: 2022-CA-0383, Categories: Environment, attorney Fees, contract
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit finds the lower court properly adhered to the prior Fifth Circuit panel’s mandate affirming in part the district court’s judgment in favor of the excavating company on its breach of contract claim regarding dirt removal from a construction worksite. Though the construction company says that it was not required to pay $81,000 in materials and labor because the excavating company stopped performing before the work was completed, its prior breach and delay-causing failure to manage the site excused the failure to perform. Any changes in the damages sought do not prevent the excavating company from obtaining proper fees. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 19, 2023, Case #: 21-40629, Categories: Construction, attorney Fees, contract
J. Harris finds the district court properly entered summary judgment in favor of the law firm in this suit brought by one of its lawyers who disputes his share of a contingency fee received in a trade secrets case. The firm deposited $1 million into the lawyer’s account and asked him to sign a release of all claims. He refused to sign the release, keeping the money and continuing to work at the firm. All evidence shows that the lawyer failed to return the funds within a reasonable time and made no effort to even after filing suit. There is no error in the conclusion that the lawyer’s actions constitute acceptance of the accord and satisfaction as a matter of law. Affirmed.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harris, Filed On: May 18, 2023, Case #: 20210591-CA, Categories: Administrative Law, attorney Fees, contract
J. Zahn finds that the trial court was right to dismiss a contract and specific performance action over an offer to buy a townhome development. The offer was not an enforceable contract because it constituted an agreement to agree, while the property description and terms in the offer were not adequately specific under the statute of frauds. The seller is entitled to attorney fees incurred at trial and on appeal as the prevailing party. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Zahn, Filed On: May 17, 2023, Case #: 49184, Categories: Property, attorney Fees, contract