R.L. Turner Corp. v. Town of Brownsburg
2012 Ind. LEXIS 23
| Ind. | 2012Background
- Turner's suit against the Town of Brownsburg involved tortious interference, quantum meruit, and related claims regarding a settlement and the Brownsburg Municipal Building Corporation (BMBC).
- BMBC had contracted Turner as general contractor for the municipal complex; the Town assigned its rights to BMBC in 2005, and Turner later sued for damages after project delays.
- The trial court granted the Town’s motions to dismiss and for partial summary judgment; the judgment referenced only costs, not expressly attorneys' fees.
- Following the judgment, the Town renewed a petition for attorneys' fees and costs under Indiana statutes, seeking recovery as part of costs for frivolous claims.
- Turner argued the court lacked post-judgment jurisdiction to award fees and that the fee petition was untimely; the Town and Court of Appeals disagreed, and the Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer.
- The Supreme Court held that post-judgment proceedings for attorneys’ fees are permissible and reviewed the award for compliance with statutory standards, including special findings requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Post-judgment jurisdiction to award fees | Turner: court had no jurisdiction after final judgment | Town: court had authority to review fee petition post-judgment | Post-judgment jurisdiction exists; fees may be awarded after judgment |
| Timeliness and character of the fee petition | Turner: petition was untimely under TR 59/60 | Town: petition timely; not governed by those time limits | Petition timely; post-judgment fee awards permissible without triggering Rule 59/60 limits |
| Requirement of express findings for fee award under Ind. Code §§ 34-52-1-1(b) and 34-13-3-21 | Turner: must have explicit special findings; otherwise error | Town: implicit findings sufficient if supported by petition | No explicit findings needed; implicit conclusions valid given petition grounds |
| Role of trial court’s findings and form of the order | Turner: lack of explicit rationale undermines award | Town: order adequate; aligns with petition and law | Court acted within proper discretion; findings need not be verbatim if supported by petition |
| Relation to the “costs” label in judgment | Turner: judgment’s use of 'costs' excluded attorneys’ fees | Town: costs language reserved potential post-judgment fee review | Costs and fees distinguished; fee petition authorized post-judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- K.S. v. State, 849 N.E.2d 538 (Ind. 2006) (distinguishes jurisdiction from procedural error; common-law framework)
- Perry v. Stitzer Buick GMC, Inc., 637 N.E.2d 1282 (Ind. 1994) (defines subject matter vs. personal jurisdiction distinctions)
- State Bd. of Tax Comm'rs v. Town of St. John, 751 N.E.2d 657 (Ind. 2001) (American rule on attorney's fees; costs v. fees)
- Wiley v. McShane, 875 N.E.2d 273 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (costs include filing/witness fees; not attorneys' fees)
- Van Winkle v. Nash, 761 N.E.2d 856 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (distinguishes costs from attorneys' fees)
- Inlow v. Henderson, Daily, Withrow & Devoe, 804 N.E.2d 833 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (fee awards without explicit findings have precedent; context matters)
- Walker v. Pullen, 943 N.E.2d 349 (Ind. 2011) (special findings implications under TR 59(J))