114 So. 3d 1158
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- St. Blanc petitioned for balance on promissory note plus interest and attorney fees; Stabile and Burelle (guarantors) liable individually on guaranty.
- BBI asserted reconventional demand claiming fraud, defective sale warranties, and requested nullification or rescission of sale, with damages and fees; third-party demand against St. Blanc Enterprises, Inc. and later amended claims for unjust enrichment and detrimental reliance.
- Motions for summary judgment were filed; all but one denied; trial court granted partial summary judgment for St. Blanc and dismissed BBI’s breach-of-warranty claim.
- Trial on February 6–7, 2012 resulted in judgment for St. Blanc for $42,103.84; BBI’s reconventional demand was dismissed.
- May 25, 2012, trial court awarded St. Blanc attorney’s fees and costs totaling $10,525.96, far less than St. Blanc’s claimed $120,198.57.
- St. Blanc appeals contending the fee award was an abuse of discretion and failed to apply proper Rivet-factor analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the trial court abuse its discretion in setting attorneys’ fees? | St. Blanc claims Rivet factors were not properly applied. | Court considered evidence and applicable Rivet factors in determining reasonableness. | No abuse; Rivet factors properly considered; award affirmed. |
| Was the 25% contractual benchmark proper or should Rivet factors alone govern the award? | Court should apply Rivet factors instead of a fixed 25% or minimum amount. | Contractual terms allow a standard 25% or minimum amount subject to reasonableness. | Contractual provision and reasonableness review supported by Rivet factors; award affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brandner v. Staf-Rath, L.L.C., 102 So.3d 186 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2012) (prevailing-party attorneys’ fees governed by contract or statute; reasonableness review)
- Gottsegen v. Diagnostic Imaging Services, 672 So.2d 940 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1996) (factors for reasonable attorneys’ fees include complexity and results)
- Rivet v. State, Dept. of Transp. & Dev., 680 So.2d 1154 (La. 1996) (set of Rivet factors for determining reasonable fees)
- Doucet v. First Fed. Guar., 72 So.3d 478 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2011) (trial-court discretion in fixing attorneys’ fees; abuse of discretion standard)
- Jackson Square Towne House Home Ass’n, Inc. v. Hannigan, 867 So.2d 960 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2004) (court may determine reasonableness of fees independent of actual charged amounts)
- In re Succession of Minor, 982 So.2d 134 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2008) (necessity of timely requests for appellate reasons and articulating reasons for judgments)
- City of Eunice v. Carrier, 821 So.2d 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2002) (procedural guidance on when reasons for judgment are required)