The "American Rule" is that parties pay their own legal fees for a dispute. Fees can be shifted by contract or by statute, but fee-shifting remains in the minority in US lawsuits. When legal fees are recoverable, the court (judge) normally evaluates and determines the amount of legal fees to be awarded to a successful party, based on detailed billing information submitted by outside counsel. But what is the outcome if the prevailing party relied primarily on its in-house counsel, who was on the company payroll all the time and never submitted any bills? The Massachusetts Appeals Court has held that reasonable fees attributable to the in-house attorney's effort are recoverable.1
The underlying dispute included a particularly nasty set of actions by the losing party, and the court decided that the defendant had acted in an "unfair and deceptive" manner, violating the Massachusetts fair trade practice statute. The other side was thus entitled to recover its legal fees. But most of the work had been done by an in-house attorney who had not billed the company for his effort, and so the losing party argued that legal fees had not been "incurred" for the in-house attorney's effort.
The trial court had awarded attorneys' fees "on principles of fairness, the public policy served by fee awards, and case law upholding statutorily mandated fee awards even in the absence of billing." The Appeals Court agreed, and noted that "having in-house counsel engaged in the present suit had a concrete financial impact on [the prevailing party], which we conclude 'incurred' a cost." Also, there is a deterrent purpose in awarding attorneys' fees, and the losing party should not benefit simply because the prevailing party chose to use in-house instead of outside counsel.
Footnote
1 Holland v. Jachmann, Mass. App. Ct. No. 13-P-0280 (May 14, 2014).
This article is for general information and does not include full legal analysis of the matters presented. It should not be construed or relied upon as legal advice or legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The description of the results of any specific case or transaction contained herein does not mean or suggest that similar results can or could be obtained in any other matter. Each legal matter should be considered to be unique and subject to varying results. The invitation to contact the authors or attorneys in our firm is not a solicitation to provide professional services and should not be construed as a statement as to any availability to perform legal services in any jurisdiction in which such attorney is not permitted to practice.
Duane Morris LLP, a full-service law firm with more than 700 attorneys in 24 offices in the United States and internationally, offers innovative solutions to the legal and business challenges presented by today's evolving global markets. Duane Morris LLP, a full-service law firm with more than 700 attorneys in 24 offices in the United States and internationally, offers innovative solutions to the legal and business challenges presented by today's evolving global markets. The Duane Morris Institute provides training workshops for HR professionals, in-house counsel, benefits administrators and senior managers.
