Brandner v. Staf-Rath, L.L.C.
102 So. 3d 186
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Brandners appeal a judgment awarding Staf-Rath $56,500 in attorneys’ fees and $15,096.61 in costs under the purchase agreement for the commercial property.
- Trial court awarded fees equal to the reconventional-demand award and approved costs, declining any excess.
- Brandners sued for liquidated damages and specific performance; Staf-Rath prevailed on its reconventional demand; appellate panel previously affirmed.
- A three-day hearing on reasonable attorneys’ fees occurred during the pendency of the appeal; Brandners challenged the billing and redactions; Staf-Rath introduced testimony and bills showing payment.
- The court applied Rivet factors, found the matter complex and lengthy, and ultimately awarded fees equal to the main-demand amount plus costs; Court rejected further fee enhancement.
- This appeal challenges both entitlement and amount of fees and the costs award; the appellate court affirms and taxes all appeal costs to Brandners.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to contractual fees | Brandner contends no contractual entitlement to fees. | Staf-Rath asserts it prevailed and is entitled to fees under the contract. | Staf-Rath entitled to contractual fees. |
| Reasonableness of fee amount | Brandner argues the fee amount is excessive and includes improper charges. | Staf-Rath maintains the amount reflects complexity and effort under Rivet factors. | No abuse; award equal to main-demand fees reasonable. |
| Costs award validity | Brandner argues costs were improperly awarded and not all were recoverable. | Staf-Rath maintains costs are recoverable as provided in the contract and properly supported. | Costs affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rivet v. State, Dept. of Transp. and Development, 680 So.2d 1154 (La. 1996) (defines general rule on recovery of attorneys’ fees under contract or statute; abuse-standard on appeal)
- Health Educ. and Welfare Federal Credit Union v. Peoples, 83 So.3d 1055 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2011) (awards reasonable fees in redhibition context; supports Rivet factors applicability)
- Stone Ins., Inc. v. Beyer-Beeson Ins. Agency, Inc., 45 So.3d 1125 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2010) (recognizes factors for determining reasonable attorneys’ fees)
- Dailey v. The Home Furnishings Store, 857 So.2d 1051 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2003) (supports award of attorney fees in complex contractual disputes)
- Acadian Gas Pipeline System v. Bourgeois, 890 So.2d 634 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2004) (fee awards in contractual disputes; consideration of complexity)
- Garden Lakes Condominium Homeowners Ass’n v. Perrier, 66 So.3d 1147 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2011) (fee award supports evaluation of complexity and effort)
- South Texas Pioneer Millwork v. Favalora Constructors, 90 So.3d 1092 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2012) (affirming fee awards exceeding main-demand amount in appropriate cases)
- Rauch-Milliken Int’l, Inc. v. Halprin, 30 So.3d 879 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2009) (trial court’s discretion in awarding costs; standard of review)