306 P.3d 661
Or. Ct. App.2013Background
- London petitions for reconsideration to clarify disposition on the supplemental judgment for attorney fees.
- ZRZ Realty VI addressed issues on attorney fees awarded to Zidell via a general judgment and a supplemental judgment for time spent on the petition.
- The decision remanded the general-judgment fee award for reconsideration of apportionment after ruling errors regarding London’s duty to indemnify Zidell.
- The Court concluded the trial court erred in awarding fees for the duty to indemnify and remanded for reevaluation; it also addressed the supplemental award for time spent preparing the initial petition.
- Questions arose whether reversing the underlying fee award also reversed the supplemental judgment; the court clarified that ORS 20.220(3)(a) operated to deem the supplemental judgment reversed.
- On reconsideration, the court clarified that the supplemental judgment was reversed and left the remand to the trial court to determine the total reasonable attorney-fee award on remand, including potential adjustments to the initial and supplemental fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the supplemental judgment was reversed by operation of law. | London: supplemental judgment reversed along with general judgment. | Zidell: supplemental judgment affirmed on remand. | Supplemental judgment deemed reversed under ORS 20.220(3)(a). |
| Effect of reversal on remand scope and fee amounts on remand. | Remand should reapportion and potentially preserve substantial fees. | Remand may alter both initial and supplemental fee amounts. | Remand for trial court to reconsider and set reasonable attorney fees, including time spent on the initial petition. |
| Whether the trial court can reconsider block-billing-related aspects on remand. | Block billing arguments do not foreclose remand. | Block billing issues do not dictate remand outcome. | Court leaves remand discretion to adjust fees; previous rejection of block-billing argument does not bind remand result. |
| Whether reconsideration should affect other aspects of the fee awards beyond the initial issues. | Supplemental and initial fees are interconnected and interdependent. | Possible separation of issues on remand. | Remand may address both initial and supplemental awards as interrelated; amount left to trial court. |
Key Cases Cited
- ZRZ Realty v. Beneficial Fire and Casualty Ins., 255 Or App 524 (2013) (affects attorney-fee awards and remand procedure in related cases)
- ZRZ Realty v. Beneficial Fire and Casualty Ins., 349 Or 117 (2010) (decision on duty to indemnify issues (ZRZ Realty III))
- ZRZ Realty v. Beneficial Fire and Casualty Ins., 349 Or 657 (2011) (modification on recon (ZRZ Realty IV))