Trent v. Connor Enterprises, Inc.
452 P.3d 1072
Or. Ct. App.2019Background
- Plaintiff (Trent) sued former employer Connor for unpaid wages under Oregon law and the FLSA; counsel sent written notice of a $511.87 deficiency one week before filing the complaint.
- After filing, defendant mailed a check for $1,044.74 which plaintiff did not cash; settlement talks continued and defendant made an ORCP 54 E offer to allow judgment for $2,500 on all claims, which plaintiff accepted. A stipulated general judgment for $2,500 was entered; fees and costs were reserved for the court.
- Plaintiff sought attorney fees (~$45,000) and costs under ORS 652.200(2) and 29 U.S.C. § 216(b); the trial court awarded costs but denied attorney fees, finding plaintiff acted unreasonably and in bad faith and that plaintiff’s counsel unreasonably failed to give adequate pre-filing notice under ORS 652.200(2).
- The trial court declined to treat the denial as a discretionary reduction under ORS 20.075 and instead concluded plaintiff was not "entitled" to fees under either statute.
- Plaintiff appealed the denial of attorney fees; the appellate court reviewed statutory interpretation de novo and discretionary rulings for abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to fees under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) | FLSA mandates a reasonable attorney fee to a prevailing plaintiff once judgment is entered. | Fees can be denied for plaintiff's bad-faith conduct; plaintiff did not "prevail" or any violation was de minimis. | Reversed: FLSA fee award is mandatory when plaintiff obtains judgment; trial court erred. Remand to determine reasonable amount. |
| Entitlement to fees under ORS 652.200(2) (notice exception) | ORS 652.200(2) mandates fees for a plaintiff with judgment; plaintiff’s counsel gave written notice before filing (one week), satisfying the statute. | Counsel’s pre-filing notice was insufficiently timely (only a week) and thus was an unreasonable failure to give notice—triggering the statutory exception. | Reversed: statute’s exception applies only when counsel "failed" to give notice before filing. Because notice was given before filing, the exception does not apply. Remand to determine reasonable amount. |
| Alleged abuse of discretion in findings of bad faith/unreasonableness | No record support for findings that plaintiff acted unreasonably or in bad faith; trial court therefore abused its discretion in denying fees. | Trial court’s factual findings justified denying fees. | Rejected as presented: appellate court held the trial court misconstrued the statutes and thus did not properly exercise discretion to set fee amounts; remand for fee determination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Newhouse v. Robert’s Ilima Tours, Inc., 708 F.2d 436 (9th Cir. 1983) (FLSA grants prevailing plaintiffs a reasonable attorney fee)
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752 (1980) (discusses awarding fees to defendants based on plaintiff’s bad-faith litigation conduct)
- Outdoor Media Dimensions, Inc. v. State of Oregon, 331 Or. 634, 20 P.3d 180 (2001) (permitting appellate affirmation on alternative grounds is discretionary)
- PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or. 606, 859 P.2d 1143 (1993) (text and context primary in statutory interpretation)
- State v. Gaines, 346 Or. 160, 206 P.3d 1042 (2009) (statutory construction methodology)
- Mathis v. St. Helens Auto Center, Inc., 298 Or. App. 647, 447 P.3d 490 (2019) (discusses ORS 652.200(2) notice provision)