Home Page      Legal Forms       Business Ethics Training        
Reasonable Fees Law

Contact Bucklin for Opinons, Seminars, or Expert Witness Testimony

This section you are viewing includes these additional pages


Up
 


Disclaimer: Information contained in pages and articles on this site provide general information and are not intended to provide legal advice on any specific legal matter or factual situation. This information is not intended to create or provide a lawyer-client relationship. It is not legal advice. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Read full Disclaimers and Legal Notices.  

This page has some items on reasonable fee law that may prove helpful in advancing your thinking or research on the subject.

In Arthur Anderson & Co., v. Perry Equipment Corp., (Texas May 16, 1997), the Texas Supreme Court held that evidence of a contingency fee contract by itself cannot support an award of attorney's fees. The plaintiff must present evidence of the reasonableness and necessity of fees in light of the eight factors required by the Texas disciplinary Rules. 

It has sometimes been said that a fair fee will normally do three things, to wit:

bulletreflect the client's perception of the value of the services performed
bulletoffer the client predictability of the fee
bulletreward the attorney for excellence, efficiency, and productivity.

Most court decisions, however, use eight factors in determining a reasonable fee.  The Texas Supreme Court is representative of the majority.  In Texas the following are relevant factors that should be considered (and thus can be put into evidence as relevant) in determining what is a reasonable attorney fee. [They are traditionally considered as only eight items, but really the first item, which has to do with the hourly fee rate multiplied by the hours of time, can be broken down into 3 sub items.] See Arthur Anderson & Co. v. Perry Equipment Corp., 945 SW2d 812 (TX, 1997) (citing TX Disc. Sec 1.04) R. Prof. Conduct

bullet1. The hours of time needed, and the skill level needed during those hours, considered in the sub items of |
    a. The time and labor required, 
    b. the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and
    c. the skill required to perform the legal service properly.
bullet2. The likelihood that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyer.
bullet3. The fee customarily charged in the locality or by the circumstances.
bullet4. The amount involved and the results obtained.
bullet5. The time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances.
bullet6. The nature and length of the professional relationship with the client.
bullet7. The experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer performing the services
bullet8. Whether the fee is fixed or contingent on results obtained, and the uncertainty of actual collection of the fee when due.

The usual formula of Texas courts is to say that it will consider the factors contained within the Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct in determining whether the fees were reasonable and necessary, and to stay only with those factors. [Cf.  Bocquet, 972 S.W.2d at 21-22, citing TEX.DISCIPLINARY R. PROF. CONDUCT 1.04]  The enumerated factors are the eight factors set out above.

Note: Some state and federal courts recast the second item sometimes as "the undesirability of the case", and the third item as "awards in similar cases" E.g., See Johnson v. George Highway Express, Inc., 488 F2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974).

But expert testimony needs a base. Attorneys seeking fees must keep time records!  In Heritage Resources, Inc. v Hill 8th Court of Appeals - El Paso February 13, 2003 - 08-01-00383-CV, the appeals court said it might have awarded more, but the evidence was hampered by the fact that no time records were maintained by the attorneys, their legal assistants or staff for the 9,150 billable hours claimed, with the result that 100 hours of time were deemed reasonable and equitable for the time involved in the case.

Because expert testimony of a reasonable fee is required, the only recourse contesting sides' attorneys usually have has is to have an expert testify.  Although states commonly include in their disciplinary rules an exception to the bar on an attorney testifying in his own case for testimony limited to the attorney fee, it really is not good trial advocacy to talk too highly of oneself (the jurors probably prefer to have an expert praise or criticize.)  Click here for hints on adverse expert witness depositions.

North Dakota has judicially noted the elements that go into determining a reasonable fee.  Other states also have set out the elements in court decisions. See City of Bismarck v. Thom (ND, 1977) stating that the base for determining a reasonable fee is found by multiplying the number of hours expended by each attorney by the hourly rate normally charged for similar work by attorneys of like skill in the area.  The court noted that it was for similar work by attorneys of like skill,  which is not necessarily the same as the average hourly rate of all attorneys in the area.  When this base rate is established than other less objective factors are introduced to determine a reasonable fee.

Norman, 836 F.2d at 1305-06. (“The court on reconsideration should bear in mind that the measure of reasonable hours is determined by the profession’s judgment of the time that may be conscionably billed and not the least time in which it might theoretically have been done.")

The Evidence Required to Prove the Validity of Legal Assistant Fees as a Compensable Component of Attorney Fee Awards is discussed by Vicki Kelly Britain at 63 Texas Bar Journal 261 (2000).   Although Texas courts have approved legal assistant hourly rates of $90 an hour (e.g., In the Interest of JLB, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 4901), often legal assistant fees have been disapproved in whole or in part.  Often the key to getting the legal assistant's fees approved (or disapproved) as legal fees is the testimony of an expert.

Persons starting to think about attorney fees per hour might start with some of the resources offered by the state bar associations.  For example see the Texas State Bar Law Office Management Program at http://www.texasbar.com/members/buildpractice/lomp/resource.htm

Bucklin's services

More research notes on the law of reasonable attorney fees.

The most common alternative billing methods.

bulletThe hourly fee.
bulletThe fixed fee,
bulletThe segmented fixed fee, a.k.a., the task-based fee. Specific items of service carry standard charges.
bulletPlaintiff’s contingency fee. .
bulletThe defense contingency — The lawyer and client determine a goal, in a dollar number, of would represent the usual expected result. If the matter is resolved for less than the goal amount set, the lawyer gets a percentage of savings. If the matter is resolved for more than the amount set, the lawyer reduces his hourly fee by a percentage..
bulletRetainer fee — A set charge for a range of legal services over a particular period of time.
bulletA variation of this is the availability- only retainer where a fee is paid only to insure that the lawyer will be available. Specific services are charged separately.
bulletA variation of this is the retainer trust account. A retainer amount is paid into the lawyer’s trust account and used to pay fees as they occur. This is sometimes combined with the availability - only retainer with the agreement that a certain amount if unused at the end of the period will be paid to the lawyer for staying available.
bulletCombination hourly rate (or flat fee) and contingency based on result. — A reduced hourly fee plus a reduced contingency fee. This can be used when the client cannot afford a straight hourly fee and the lawyer cannot take the risk of a full contingency arrangement.

Using this site means you accept its terms.  The information contained in this web site is not legal advice; it is for educational purposes only. Use of this site does not create an attorney/client relationship, even if you provide information to this web site, whether by e-mail or a contact form on this site.

© Copyright Leonard H. Bucklin 2000 to 01/30/2008 ©  All rights reserved.  No copying or distribution of this material may be made without the express written consent of the copyright holder.  For more information -  see the Legal Notices.