In a recent case, Smith v. Patrick W.Y. Tam Trust, the Texas Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees of $62,438.75 were unreasonable as a matter of law, but remanded the case back to the trial court for a jury determination of the fee amount. The Patrick W.Y. Tam Trust owned a shopping center […]
In a recent case, Smith v. Patrick W.Y. Tam Trust, the Texas Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees of $62,438.75 were unreasonable as a matter of law, but remanded the case back to the trial court for a jury determination of the fee amount.
The Patrick W.Y. Tam Trust owned a shopping center in Collin County, Texas, and sued one of its tenants for breach of its lease. The trust sought $215,391.50 in damages and $47,438.75 in attorneys’ fees at the trial court level (another $15,000 was sought for appeals). The jury found the tenant (actually the guarantors) liable, but only awarded $65,000 in damages and nothing in attorneys’ fees. On appeal, the court of appeals instated the full $62,438.75 in attorneys’ fees sought because the trust’s attorney presented competent evidence of fees and the defendants didn’t otherwise contest the amount.
The Texas Supreme Court wiped out the attorneys’ fee award because
the fee, though supported by uncontradicted testimony, was unreasonable in light of the amount involved and the results obtained, and in the absence of evidence that such fees were warranted due [to] circumstances unique to this case.
The court remanded the case back to the trial court for a new determination of reasonable fees (no evidence supported the jury’s refusal to award any attorney’s fees).
The question is: What happens if the new jury determines that the trust is entitled to $62,438.75 in attorneys’ fees?
You might also like:
