First Lawyer Got $10,000; Second Lawyers Got $115,000 in Minors’ Compromise Case.
Record keeping. Keyser Brothers Iron Works. 1971. Jack E. Boucher, creator. Library of Congress.
Law Offices of Marvin L. Mathis v. Lotta, Case No. B248251 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Jan. 10, 2014) (unpublished) shows the importance of providing substantiation of hours worked when there is a dispute over apportionment of fees for reasonable value of attorney work rendered.
There, a $500,000 policy limit settlement was reached in a minors’ compromise case involving the death of mother in an auto accident. However, the first attorney—claiming he did most of the work—contested an apportionment of fees by which he only received $10,000 versus $115,00 to the second attorney.
First attorney’s challenge to the fee apportionment did not succeed.
Second attorney argued that the apportionment order was not appealable, but this was found not to be the case. (Breckler v. Thaler, 87 Cal.App.3d 189, 193-194 (1978).)
On the merits, however, first attorney had provided an inadequate record to overturn the apportionment. He did not submit any estimate or substantiation as far as reasonable hours worked on the case, with a bald assertion of having contributed the most value not satisfying his quantum meruit burden in this one. Apportionment affirmed.