Doe v. Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Co.
214 So. 3d 99
La. Ct. App.2017Background
- Plaintiff Jane Doe sued Blue Cross under the Louisiana Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act; jury/trial judgment (Apr. 23, 2014) awarded $50,000 damages plus costs, judicial interest, and "reasonable attorney’s fees" to be determined later.
- The parties stipulated that attorney’s fees and costs through April 29, 2014 totaled $36,440.50 and $756.36, and agreed that if the judgment were affirmed Blue Cross would pay those sums and any fees "agreed to or awarded" after that date.
- Blue Cross appealed; this Court affirmed the 2014 judgment on May 20, 2015 (172 So.3d 132). No appellate award of additional attorney’s fees was made and Doe did not seek rehearing or Supreme Court review.
- After the writ dismissal, Blue Cross paid $101,134.40 (including the stipulated $36,440.50). Doe then moved in district court to set additional post-trial attorney’s fees (for appellate work and subsequent proceedings) and sought penalties for alleged nonpayment.
- The district court denied Doe’s motion, reasoning the appellate court had not awarded attorney’s fees for the appeal. Doe appealed the denial. The Fourth Circuit (panel opinion) affirmed the district court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court retained jurisdiction to set post-judgment fees after appeal | Trial court reserved fees; issue not reviewed on appeal so trial court retained jurisdiction | Blue Cross argued district court lacked jurisdiction after appeal concluded | Held: Trial court retained jurisdiction because fees were expressly reserved for later determination and were not reviewable on appeal |
| Whether affirmance constituted an award of additional post-trial attorney’s fees as a matter of law | Doe: Affirmance and statute require post-trial/appellate fees as a matter of law | Blue Cross: Affirmance did not award additional fees; any appellate fees must be sought via proper appellate procedure and are discretionary | Held: No — affirmance did not automatically award additional attorney’s fees; award is discretionary and not mandated here |
| Whether the parties’ stipulation obligated Blue Cross to pay post-April 29, 2014 fees ("agreed to or awarded") | Doe: Emails and communications show Blue Cross implicitly agreed to pay post-April 29 fees and failed to contest Doe’s final calculation | Blue Cross: No unequivocal agreement to pay post-April 29 fees; emails do not establish an enforceable agreement | Held: No binding agreement shown; district court did not abuse discretion in refusing post-trial fee award |
| Whether district court erred in refusing to enforce Blue Cross’ payment of the $146,761.66 judgment calculation | Doe: Blue Cross’ conduct and failure to contest figure created obligation to pay full amount | Blue Cross: Payment of $101,134.40 satisfied the stipulated sums; no further contractual obligation proven | Held: No error; court affirmed denial of Doe’s motion to set additional fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Doe v. La. Health Serv. & Indem. Co., 172 So.3d 132 (La. App. 4 Cir.) (appellate affirmance of 2014 trial judgment)
- Dixie Servs., L.L.C. v. R & B Falcon Drilling USA, Inc., 955 So.2d 214 (La. App. 4 Cir.) (attorney’s fee awards reviewed for abuse of discretion; statutory/contractual basis required)
- Law Offices of Fred L. Herman, APLC v. Helmer, 128 So.3d 310 (La. App. 5 Cir.) (trial court retains jurisdiction over fee matters reserved for later adjudication)
- Houston v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of La., 843 So.2d 542 (La. App. 2 Cir.) (appellate courts may increase fees where warranted when fees were awarded below)
- Sher v. Lafayette Ins. Co., 988 So.2d 186 (La.) (attorney’s fee awards are discretionary, not automatic)
- Peters v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 52 So.3d 229 (La. App. 4 Cir.) (stipulations have the effect of judicial admissions and bind parties and court)