Intermediate Court Actually Reverses Trial Court Cut in Fee Award to Attorney, Citing Excellent Result and Extraordinary Work of Attorney.
Here is one that we do not see that often.
At the lower court level, an attorney had a 40% contingency fee agreement to represent a disabled, mentally incompetent worker who suffered debilitating occupational injuries after a scaffolding member gave way and he fell 15 feet to a concrete floor. Employer was cited for various OSHA violations. Attorney was able to obtain a $4.9 million settlement from a third party tortfeasor, just below the $5 million policy limit of defendant, and obtain some great concessions/waiver on workers’ compensation liens. However, the lower court only awarded attorney 25% based on certain local San Bernardino County court rules–$1.225 million rather than $1.96 million under the contingency fee arrangement.
On appeal, the appellate court reversed and reinstated the $1.96 million full contingency fee in Huantes v. Built Right Construction, Inc., Case No. E053259 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 7, 2012) (unpublished).
The appellate court found that the lower court had relied on inapposite local rules, with many not even capping recovery limitations. Beyond that, Probate Code section 3601 only has a reasonableness limitation in awarding a fee in a compromise of an adult disabled person’s claim. In this situation, counsel did an exemplary job of showing how the case was iffy, how he put in a lot of personal architectural expertise into his work-up, and how the settlement was a terrific compromise. Full contingency fee richly deserved, ultimately ruled the higher court.
The attorney involved was Michael Roofian.