Adams v. Howard
2014 Ark. App. 328
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Appellant Lauren Adams appeals a circuit-court order establishing how she may recover her fee for Gary Howard's representation.
- The case references two prior appeals: Howard I (2009) and Howard II (2012).
- Adams represented Gary Howard in a 2002 suit to recover 46 acres from Gary's stepmother's trust; Adams obtained the land for Gary and placed it into Odis’s estate.
- Dispute arose over Adams's fee: a contingency contract stated 33% of damages recovered; Gary claimed the fee should come from Watkins's malpractice insurance instead.
- Gary sued Adams in 2005 for breach of contract, deceit, and negligence; a 2007 order held the attorney-fee lien valid against the real estate, but did not resolve the fee amount.
- In 2013 the court allowed Adams to foreclose on the lien but conditioned the fee on 33% of net sale proceeds after deducting Mabel Howard's $110,500 dower/homestead payment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Method of calculating Adams's fee | Adams: fee should be one-third of property value at recovery ($1.8M). | Court properly calculated as 33% of net sale proceeds after sale; not a fixed date value. | Court's method (33% of net sale proceeds after deductions) affirmed. |
| Law of the case, laches, and judicial estoppel | Gary barred by prior rulings and equity from challenging the fee. | No bar; prior order limited to lien validity, not fee amount; no improper delay or estoppel. | No reversible error; no law-of-the-case, laches, or judicial-estoppel bar. |
| Deduction of Mabel's dower from proceeds before fee | Agreed to deduct $110,500 before calculating the fee. | Deduction was proper and consented to by Adams. | Deduction upheld; agreement to deduct pre-fee amount. |
| Prejudgment interest and attorney's fees under § 16-22-308 | Adams entitled to prejudgment interest from 2005 and fees as prevailing party. | No prejudgment interest; Adams not prevailing party. | Affirmed denial of prejudgment interest and attorney's fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Simler v. Conner, 352 F.2d 138 (10th Cir. 1965) (fee calculation considerations in similar contexts)
- Rector v. Compton, 62 Ark. 279, 36 S.W. 898 (Ark. 1896) (historical fee/calculation principles)
- May Constr. Co., Inc. v. Town Creek Constr. & Dev., LLC, 383 S.W.3d 389 (Ark. 2011) (clearly erroneous standard for lien calculations)
- Gable v. Anthony, 2010 Ark. App. 757 (Ark. App. 2010) (equitable doctrine of laches fact-based inquiry)
- Purser v. Buchanan, 2013 Ark. App. 449 (Ark. App. 2013) (judicial estoppel elements and application)
- Mitchell v. Ramsey, 2011 Ark. App. 9 (Ark. App. 2011) (judicial-estoppel considerations in appellate context)
- Colquitt v. Colquitt, 2013 Ark. App. 733 (Ark. App. 2013) (consent/estoppel principles in appellate context)
- Jones v. McLemore, 2014 Ark. App. 147 (Ark. App. 2014) (procedural and doctrinal considerations in appeals)