Sycks v. Transamerica Life Insurance Company, 3:22-cv-00010

Transamerica Life Insurance Company (Transamerica) prevailed in a case against the Estates of Lila and Vernon Sycks, which concerned life insurance contract issues.
After summary judgment in its favor, Transamerica moved for attorney’s fees under Alaska Civil Rule 82, which allows for partial fee recovery by prevailing parties.
Transamerica initially claimed over $570,000 in fees, later reduced to $518,215, and sought a 20% award of actual fees under the rule.
Plaintiffs opposed the motion, challenging the reasonableness of the rates, duplication of effort, and the necessity of certain fees.
The court evaluated the hours expended, fee rates, the proportionality of effort to the case's significance, and policy concerns relating to discouragement of similar future claims.
Ultimately, the court decided on a downward adjustment, awarding Transamerica $77,732 (15% of fees actually incurred).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Reasonableness of Hourly Rates	Seattle market rates are too high; rates exceeded past similar Alaska cases.	Rates are consistent with Alaska market and court precedent.	Rates reasonable and in line with Alaska standards, some inflation.
Number of Hours / Duplication	Excessive hours billed; unnecessary duplication by multiple attorneys.	Hours necessary due to case complexity and extensive record review.	Total hours excessive, not all necessarily incurred; downward adjust.
Fees for Motions to Dismiss	Fees for two allegedly meritless motions should be excluded.	Motions to dismiss are routine, not improper; all fees should be counted.	Motions to dismiss are ordinary; exclusion not warranted.
Proportionality (Amount at Stake)	Defense fees far exceeded amount in dispute, aimed to discourage similar claims.	No argument contra; defense cited work required by the case.	Award reduced due to disparity and possible deterrence motive.

Gold Bondholders Protective Council v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 658 P.2d 776 (Alaska 1983) (affirming trial court discretion in awarding fees to prevailing party without issue-by-issue apportionment)
Belluomini v. Fred Meyer of Alaska, Inc., 993 P.2d 1009 (Alaska 1999) (rejecting exclusion of fees related to unsuccessful motions; affirming holistic fee award to prevailing party)
Reed v. Williams, 964 P.2d 453 (Alaska 1998) (noting that fee asymmetry in civil cases is generally permissible and non-prejudicial)