Joe's Concrete & Lumber, Inc. v. Concrete Works of Colorado, Inc., 252 P.3d 445

CWC contracted Marbleton, Wyoming for curb and gutter project; Hartford issued a performance bond.
Joe's Concrete supplied pricing and approximately fifty mixer loads of concrete; invoices included a collection attorney-fees clause.
Joe's filed suit in 2007 alleging breach of contract and related claims; some tort claims were dismissed before trial.
During trial in 2009, Joe's presented testimony and proposed fees; district court encouraged proof of fees and discussed statutory factors.
Post-trial, Joe's submitted detailed invoices not admitted at trial; district court ruled fee evidence inadmissible and denied fees.
Joe's appealed; the district court outcome was reversed and remanded to consider all fee evidence and perform a proper fee calculation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused discretion by denying attorney fees.	Joe's argues Rule 54 and contract allow post-trial fee proof and that evidence should be considered.	CWC contends the court properly controlled the process and rejected post-trial evidence not admitted at trial.	Yes; reversed and remanded to determine reasonable hours and rate.

Garwood v. Garwood, 2010 WY 91 (Wy. 2010) (attorney fees may be recoverable as costs or damages under contract or statute)
Grommet v. Newman, 2009 WY 150 (Wy. 2009) (fee determination guidelines and discretionary adjustments)
Capital Asset Research Corp. v. Finnegan, 216 F.3d 1268 (11th Cir. 2000) (fees collateral to merits when not an element of damages)
Carolina Power & Light Co. v. Dynegy Marketing & Trade, 415 F.3d 354 (4th Cir. 2005) (fees as element of damages vs. post-trial Rule 54(d)(2) motion)
Gose v. Hess, 822 P.2d 846 (Wyo. 1991) (discussion on attorney's fees and how they are handled)