In Washington, a party can recover its attorney fees against another party if a law or statute that governs the case provides for the recovery of attorney fees. There are many types of statutes that include these types of provisions.
the prevailing partyIn the civil context, court costs are normally awarded to the prevailing party, meaning that the 'losing' party must cover them. Rule 54(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows exceptions to this general rule via statute or court order.
Civil lawsuits generally proceed through distinct steps: pleadings, discovery, trial, and possibly an appeal. However, parties can halt this process by voluntarily settling at any time. Most cases settle before reaching trial. Arbitration is sometimes another alternative to a trial.
When you "win" a civil case in court, the jury or judge may award you money damages. In some situations the losing party against whom there is a judgment (also known as a debtor), either refuses to follow the court order or cannot afford to pay the amount of the judgment.
In most civil cases, each party is required to pay his or her own attorney's fees. However, family law is one of the few areas of the law where there is a legal basis for one party to pay the other party's legal fees. The basis for the payment of attorney's fees is found in North Carolina Statutes.
The McMartin Preschool Abuse TrialThe McMartin Preschool Abuse Trial, the longest and most expensive criminal trial in American history, should serve as a cautionary tale. When it was all over, the government had spent seven years and $15 million dollars investigating and prosecuting a case that led to no convictions.
It is a well-established rule in North Carolina that, unless a statute provides otherwise, the parties to a lawsuit are responsible for their own attorneys' fees, even if the parties have agreed to the contrary.
1. Tobacco settlements for $206 billion [The Largest Ever] In 1998, Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds, and two other tobacco companies agreed to a $206 billion settlement, at a minimum, covering medical costs for smoking-related illnesses.
The fee shifting statute’s standard for awarding costs and expenses is “as justice and equity may require;” certainly a different standard than the traditional standard of egregious conduct like bad faith or fraud.
Not so in trust litigation.
Many people are unaware that attorneys in a class action lawsuit typically don’t get paid unless they win the case, either at trial or through a settlement. They are generally paid a percentage of the money that’s recovered on behalf of the Class Members. This money is referred to as “attorneys’ fees.”
The biggest reason attorneys’ fees might be rejected is because a judge has determined the proposed settlement to be unfair in some way. It may be that the requested attorneys’ fees don’t adequately represent the work the plaintiffs’ lawyers put into the case, or that the fees are disproportionate to the benefits offered to the Class Members. The judge will usually inform the parties about his or her concerns and instruct them to revise the terms of the class action settlement accordingly.
Some settlements and judgments don’t provide monetary awards to Class Members, even if they favor the Class. In the majority of cases that go in the plaintiffs’ favor, the defendant will be required to pay the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees. In other cases, the plaintiffs may be required to pay their own legal fees. If you are thinking of filing a class action lawsuit, make sure you find out how your attorney will be paid.
You are no doubt familiar with the old saw about “strength in numbers.” For example, a single person who was misled into paying 50 cents too much for an overpriced tube of toothpaste doesn’t have enough incentive to go to the trouble and expense of litigation just to recover that small amount of money.
Through a class action, consumers are able to recover payments even if they have not put the time and effort into litigating the issue for months or even years. These actions also allow consumers to receive compensation or injunctive relief, even if it would have been financially prohibitive to take action individually.
One type of attorney fee statute that's common in many states allows a judge to require attorneys' fees to be paid to the winning party in a lawsuit that benefited the public or was brought to enforce a right that significantly affected the public interest.
It's common for attorneys' fees to be awarded when the contract at issue requires the losing side to pay the winning side's legal fees and costs. This usually occurs in a business context where the parties have specifically included an attorney fee requirement in a contract.
Judges can use an equitable remedy to require the losing side to pay attorneys' fees if they believe it would be unfair not to do so. (In law, equity generally means "fairness," and an equitable remedy is a fair solution that a judge develops because doing otherwise would lead to unfairness.) This type of equitable remedy—granting attorneys' fees to the winning side—is often used when the losing side brought a lawsuit that was frivolous, in bad faith, or to oppress the defendant, and the defendant wins.
If you don't have the funds to pay, your attorney will likely recommend bankruptcy. Attorneys' fees are generally dischargeable, meaning you can wipe them out.
This type of equitable remedy—granting attorneys' fees to the winning side—is often used when the losing side brought a lawsuit that was frivolous, in bad faith, or to oppress the defendant, and the defendant wins. Also, once in a while, a judge will grant attorneys' fees in cases of extreme attorney misconduct, to warn the offending attorney.
Also, once in a while, a judge will grant attorneys' fees in cases of extreme attorney misconduct, to warn the offending attorney. Find out what to do if you're upset with your attorney.
courts have significant discretion when it comes to the awarding of attorneys' fees, and while judges do not generally like departing from the American Rule, they might require a losing side to pay the other's attorneys' fees in certain limited situations. A state court judge can also impose an "additur" increasing the amount of a jury award, which, in effect, can have the same result, but again, it's rare. You shouldn't count on receiving additional funds through either of these mechanisms.
If a claim for attorneys’ fees is made, the Court may be faced with two separate decisions. First, the Court must determine if a party is entitled to have its fees paid by the other side. If not, the analysis ends there.
The parties include this clause to encourage negotiation rather than litigation in a dispute over the contract.
The amount of fees owed can be determined based on several factors including the time attorneys spent on the case, the experience of the attorneys, and the nature of the claims.
These statutes are designed to encourage people harmed in certain ways to bring claims.
A judge can order the losing party to pay the winning party’s fees. This power is typically reserved for cases in which the judge has written authority to do so. Some situations where a judge might order attorney fees include:
The short answer is no. In most cases, each party only pays for its own attorney fees. This allows litigants to pursue legal cases regardless of their financial means. As a result, this rule enables parties to bring cases without worrying about the burden of paying the other side’s legal fees if they lose. But there are exceptions to the rule.