Carmen Enters., Inc. v. Murpenter, LLC
185 A.3d 380
Pa. Super. Ct.2018Background
- Carmen Enterprises (owned/controlled by Bruce J. Chasan) sold travel-agency assets, including a client mailing list, to Murpenter, LLC under a 2001 Purchase and Sale Agreement that contained a contractual attorney-fees provision for collection suits.
- Murpenter disputed delivery/quality of the mailing list and withheld an installment payment; Carmen sued in 2002. The case involved extensive discovery, counterclaims, a bad-faith bankruptcy filing by Murpenter, and many contested motions over ~11–16 years.
- Trial (bench) in 2013 resulted in a judgment awarding Carmen ~$45,057 on the breach claim (final judgment reflected a larger docket amount). Carmen then sought over $1.18 million in attorneys’ fees for Chasan (2,623.8 hours at $450/hr). Trial court initially denied fee request; a Superior Court panel remanded solely to determine a reasonable fee for Chasan.
- On remand, after hearings the trial court reduced Chasan’s hourly rate to $200/hr, disallowed many claimed hours as excessive or unsupported, and awarded $405,400 (later reflected as $450,400 in parts of the record).
- Both parties appealed the remand-fee determination. The Superior Court (this panel) reviewed for abuse of discretion and affirmed the trial court’s fee award, holding the award was supported by the record and the trial court properly applied factors for reasonableness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Carmen) | Defendant's Argument (Murpenter) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appealability of fee order | Order not final; trial court retained jurisdiction to reconsider; appeals should be quashed | Fee order was final and appealable; remand resolved the only remaining issue | Fee order is final and appealable; appeals may proceed |
| Whether trial court exceeded remand mandate by not adding other damages or fees | Trial court should have re-molded verdict to include additional post-trial fees and other contractual damages | Remand concerned only Chasan’s fee; other issues were previously decided | Trial court complied with remand; it properly limited its consideration to Chasan’s fee |
| Proper hourly rate for Chasan | $450/hr (based on prior firm rates and uncontested by opposing counsel) | Rate excessive for the work here; trial court should determine fair rate | Trial court did not abuse discretion reducing rate to $200/hr given lack of evidence of solo-practice rate and character of services |
| Reasonableness of hours claimed | Many hours were necessary due to Murpenter’s obstruction; reductions were arbitrary | Hours claimed were excessive, duplicative, and unsupported; fee award should be minimal or zero | Trial court’s large reductions of claimed hours were supported; award affirmed as not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- In re LaRocca’s Trust Estate, 246 A.2d 337 (Pa. 1968) (sets factors for determining reasonable attorney fees and defers to trial court discretion)
- Gilmore by Gilmore v. Dondero, 582 A.2d 1106 (Pa. Super. 1990) (appellate review of court-awarded fees limited to plain error/abuse of discretion)
- In re Huffman’s Estate, 36 A.2d 640 (Pa. 1944) (fees must be fair and moderate)
- Miller Elec. Co. v. DeWeese, 918 A.2d 114 (Pa. 2007) (order on counsel fees is appealable when entered)
- Fastuca v. L.W. Molnar & Assocs., 950 A.2d 980 (Pa. Super. 2008) (standard for appealability review is plenary)
- Knisel v. Oaks, 645 A.2d 253 (Pa. Super. 1994) (courts must determine appealability jurisdiction sua sponte)
- In re Roos’ Estate, 451 A.2d 255 (Pa. Super. 1982) (recognizes counsel-fee orders as final, appealable orders)