As with any other form of employment, attorneys are entitled to compensation for the work they perform. Attorneys typically discuss the form of payment at the outset, before agreeing to take a case. When one party’s legal costs are ordered to be paid by the opposing party, the reasonableness of Indiana attorney fee award amounts is a matter for the court to decide based on the specifics of the case and legal precedent.

Determining Reasonableness of Indiana Attorney Fee Award in Matters before a Court

Generally, there are three different forms of payment arrangements between clients and attorneys: a flat fee; a contingent fee based on the outcome of the case; or by the hour. In the American system of law, parties are usually held responsible for paying their own attorney fees.

However, pursuant to certain statutes, a prevailing party may be awarded attorney fees for bringing a particular case. The subsequent question that will normally arise when attorney fees are being awarded is how much the attorney is entitled to receive under a court order for reasonable attorney fees.

A Case Study in Reasonableness of Indiana Attorney Fee Awards

When an attorney or law firm spends a significant amount of time on a case that results in a favorable decision, but minor damages, the question of the proportionality of attorney fee award amounts can arise. The Indiana Court of Appeals examined the issue of reasonable attorney fees in R.L. Turner Corp. v. Wressell, in the context of a case involving an alleged violation of the Common Construction Wage Act (“CCWA”). 

This case dealt with a construction worker who alleged his employer significantly underpaid his wages and benefits under the CCWA. The Indiana Wage Payment Statute, Indiana Code § 22-2-5-1 et seq., provides that an employer who failed to pay an employee wages is subsequently liable for the employee’s reasonable attorney fees and court costs. The plaintiff worker, Wressell, brought action against his former employer seeking payment of the fringe benefits.

Justifying a Large Indiana Attorney’s Fee Award

Wressell’s attorneys spent over 300 hours in litigation over a four-year period. His case involved several appeals, and his attorneys were successful in receiving an award for his unpaid wages.

The trial court reviewed the description of hours billed by Wressell’s attorneys and noted that a mere 3.7 hours were “less detail[ed] than might be desired.” The trial judge also noted that 16.9 hours were spent on an unsuccessful cross-motion for summary judgment, which led the trial court to deduct those 16.9 hours from the fee award.

Ultimately, the trial court stated the attorneys worked 332.9 hours with an hourly rate of $300 per hour, totaling $99,870 as the reasonable attorney fees, even though Wressell’s award was only $3,852.82 in compensatory damages for his unpaid wages and $7,705.64 in treble damages. The trial court determined that the proportionality of attorney fee award amounts to damages awarded to the client was not among the factors determining reasonableness of Indiana attorney’s fee award totals.

The trial court reasoned that “[i]f an attorney cannot earn a fee commensurate with the significant work it takes to vindicate what might be a modest right or a modest injustice … than modest injustices will continue.”

Factors Determining Reasonableness of Indiana Attorney’s Fee Award

On appeal, the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s fee award, noting that several factors were involved in determining reasonableness of Indiana attorney’s fee award amounts:

• The nature and difficulty of the litigation;
• The time, skill, and effort involved;
• The fee customarily charged for similar legal services;
• The amount involved;
• The time limitations imposed by the circumstances; and
• The result achieved in the litigation.

Ultimately, the Indiana appellate court agreed with the trial court and found the large Indiana attorney’s fee award to be reasonable. Several of these factors were easily established by Wressell’s attorneys because his case was in litigation for over four years, involved several appeals, and was ultimately successful in awarding him his wages.

The court specifically rejected the notion that a 2012 mechanic’s lien case, Ponziano Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Quadri Enterprises, LLC, provided for a limit on the amount of an attorney fee based on the potential recovery, holding that case “address[ed] a very narrow issue.” In fact, outside of that narrow exception, the appellate court disclaimed any legal basis—statutory or judicial—to limit an attorney’s fee award based on the amount in dispute or recovered in litigation.

Reasonableness of Indiana Attorney Fee Award Is Established by Records of Work, Not Awards of Damages

If you need assistance determining the reasonableness of Indiana attorney fee award amounts, or have other legal questions, Corey Meridew or any of the attorneys of Camden & Meridew, P.C. will take the time to help you understand your case and define your next steps. Contact us today by calling 317-770-0000 or complete our online contact form.

This website supplies general information about the law but it is provided for informational purposes only. This content does not create an attorney-client relationship and more importantly is not meant to constitute legal advice. You should not act on any of the information contained herein without first consulting an attorney.