2019 ND 252
N.D.2019Background:
- In 2014 Rocky Mountain recorded two oil-and-gas construction liens; Mitchell’s posted lien-release bonds substituting bonds for the wells as security.
- Rocky Mountain sued to foreclose the liens; the district court originally invalidated the liens and awarded fees to Mitchell’s.
- This Court reversed the district court, held the liens were not invalid, and remanded for proceedings consistent with that opinion and a proper award of attorney’s fees. Rocky Mountain Steel Founds., Inc. v. Brockett Co., LLC, 2018 ND 96, 909 N.W.2d 671.
- On remand Rocky Mountain sought $49,554 in attorney’s fees incurred pre-appeal, $11,831 for the appeal, and $9,260.50 for fees on remand; Mitchell’s opposed.
- The district court awarded $19,025 for work pursuing the bond claims, denied appellate fees, and made no explanation for denying remand fees; Rocky Mountain appealed the fee rulings.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rocky Mountain is entitled to all pre-appeal attorney’s fees it requested | Rocky Mountain: § 35-24-13(5) allows recovery of all reasonable fees incurred in the suit, including work common to claims against Brockett | Mitchell’s: Fees limited to work on the bond claim; unrelated claims (against Brockett) are not recoverable from Mitchell’s | Affirmed in part: Fees limited to reasonable work pursuing the bond claim; district court did not abuse discretion in awarding $19,025 |
| Whether Rocky Mountain is entitled to attorney’s fees for the prior appeal | Rocky Mountain: § 35-24-13(5) does not exclude appellate fees; appeal is part of the case and fees should not dilute recovery | Mitchell’s: Appellate fees recoverable only when prevailing party also prevailed at trial and on appeal; each party should bear its own appeal costs here | Reversed: Rocky Mountain is entitled to reasonable appellate attorney’s fees under § 35-24-13(5); district court misapplied law by denying them |
| Whether Rocky Mountain is entitled to fees incurred on remand and whether district court erred in failing to explain denial | Rocky Mountain: Remand work is part of the case and recoverable under §§ 35-24-19 and 35-24-13(5) | Mitchell’s: (argued district court implicitly right to deny; appeal expenses would have been incurred regardless) | Reversed and remanded: District court gave no rationale for denying remand fees; must either award reasonable fees or explain why none are warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Rocky Mountain Steel Founds., Inc. v. Brockett Co., LLC, 909 N.W.2d 671 (N.D. 2018) (prior appeal reversing invalidation of liens and remanding for proper attorney-fee award)
- Northern Excavating Co., Inc. v. Sisters of Mary of the Presentation Long Term Care, 815 N.W.2d 280 (N.D. 2012) (limits fee awards to fees reasonably expended contesting the lien, not unrelated claims)
- Troutman v. Pierce, Inc., 402 N.W.2d 920 (N.D. 1987) (statutory fee awards may include successful defense on appeal to avoid dilution of trial recovery)
- Schwab v. Zajac, 823 N.W.2d 737 (N.D. 2012) (discussing appellate fee recovery where statute authorizes fees)
- Deacon’s Development, LLP v. Lamb, 719 N.W.2d 379 (N.D. 2006) (reaffirming American Rule: fees only recoverable by statute or contract)
- Gratech Co., Ltd. v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 729 N.W.2d 326 (N.D. 2007) (remanding when trial court fails to explain basis for discretionary rulings)