Virginia Qui Tam Law.com
  • ABOUT VAQUITAMLAW.COM
Browsing: / Home / Virginia Supreme Court Issues Important Attorney’s Fee Opinion
Print Email Shortlink

Virginia Supreme Court Issues Important Attorney’s Fee Opinion

By Zachary Kitts on May 26, 2017 in Mandatory Fee Shifting Clauses in Litigation

 

 

 

 

 

 

Virginia Supreme Court Issues Important Attorney’s Fee Opinion

The Virginia Supreme Court issued an important attorney’s fee opinion recently.  The opinion, in Lambert v. Sea Oats Condominium Association, Inc., — S.E.2d. —-, 2017 WL 1378202 (Va., 2017) should be of interest to Virginia practitioners, as it lays to rest several hobgoblin-style arguments normally made by those resisting a fee petition in Virginia state courts.

As regular readers know, I maintain more than a passing interest in this topic for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that much of my law practice concerns fee-shifting statutes, and I have served as an expert witness in a number of cases on this topic.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Martha Lambert filed a civil action in a Virginia General District Court (for non-Virginia lawyers, GDCs have jurisdiction over misdemeanor criminal cases and civil cases up to $25,000).  Her claim alleged, in a nutshell, that her condominium association failed to reimburse her for a repair to the common area of her condominium in the amount of $500.  She sought judgment in the amount of $500 plus an award of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Va. Code § 55-79.3(A).  Under that code section a prevailing party “shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees” in an action to enforce compliance with condominium instruments.

Lambert lost at the GDC, and appealed to the Circuit Court, where she won.  In addition to the $500 in damages awarded, she sought attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $9568.50.  Citing the small nature of her award – and nothing else – the court awarded her exactly $375 in attorney’s fees and costs.

THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA REVERSES THE CIRCUIT COURT

Justice Mims, writing for SCOVA held that while a Circuit Court can consider the amount of damages awarded, that that is only one factor in an overall analysis of the reasonable nature of the fee. More important is his holding that Circuit Courts cannot limit an award of attorney’s fees based on a small award at trial if a plaintiff receives everything they demanded in the ad damnum.

This case is important for another reason as well.  It appears to put to rest the issue of whether a party must include evidence of its attorney’s fees in a fee-shifting case as part of its case in chief.  Where a party seeks to recover its legal fees pursuant to a statutory or contractual fee-shifting provision, it is appropriate to delay the issue of an attorney’s fee award until after the merits of the case have been decided.  The Court referenced Virginia Rule 3:25(D), which allows the parties to request a Court Order establishing a procedure for adjudicating an attorney’s fees claim after the case in chief has concluded.

As Virginia practitioners know, our Supreme Court is not big on issuing guidance to lawyers and litigants, so when it does we should all listen and listen close, and hopefully Judges throughout the Commonwealth will do the same.

 

 

Share this on: Mixx Delicious Digg Facebook Twitter
court awarded attorney's feesfactors courts consider in awarding attorneys feesreasonable attorney's fees
  • Related Stories
  • Most Popular
  • Virginia Lawyers Weekly Article on Qui Tam Actions to Enforce Tariffs
  • Recent False Claims Act Developments
  • The federal False Claims Act is Important because it reduces corruption in American Society
  • Blog Author Zachary Kitts Announces Second-Largest Settlement in Virginia for 2021
  • K&G Law Group Announces Partial Settlement of Qui Tam Action for $12.7 million (Part I)
  • PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT PART II OF II: WHAT’S PAST IS PROLOGUE
  • The Blog of Legal Times on argument in Allison Engine Company v. United States ex rel Thacker
  • Practice Examples: Fairfax County Budget Woes and the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act
  • Qui Tam Resource Tip: the Project on Government Oversight
  • Virginia Achieves A-minus Rating for Good Government
  • Qui Tam Practice Example: Documentation of a Qui Tam Claim is not to be taken lightly by potential relators
  • LexisNexis and the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA) to publish new practice commentaries on the Federal False Claims Act
← Previous Next →

Search

Monthly Archives

  • March 2025
  • October 2022
  • April 2022
  • June 2021
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019

Authors

  • Zachary Kitts

Copyright © 2025 Virginia Qui Tam Law.com.

Virginia Qui Tam Law.com is the first blog dedicated to the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act and to false claims act litigation in Virginia.