fee disputes

Attorney sued for fees charged for representation in an underlying family law case. After paying substantial fees, the client stopped, claiming attorney’s fees were unreasonable and representation inadequate.

Attorney sued for fees charged in an underlying trademark infringement case brought against defendants’ former partner. Defendants claimed no money was due because of excessive charges and malpractice, i.e. plaintiff's representation was not competent, he was unprepared for hearings, unfamiliar with partnership dissolution law and failed to allege viable theories against defendant in the underlying case.

Attorney represented an entity client in an underlying lengthy arbitration and won. Client failed to pay and then defaulted when attorney sued. Attorney then sued a different entity on alter ego grounds, emphasizing the overlap of management, location, shareholders and employees.

Plaintiff attorney represented the special litigation committee of the board of directors in connection with a shareholder derivative action. Plaintiff had a written fee agreement signed by the committee which was ratified by the board. When the corporation refused to pay the substantial bill, plaintiff sued the corporation. Defendant alleged the charges were excessive despite prior approval by the committee. Plaintiff contended that he represented the committee not the corporation, which therefore had no standing to object to the bills.

Plaintiff law firm settled an accident case for $15,000 policy limits. Client retained a new firm to pursue an underinsured motorist claim which was settled for a substantial sum. Plaintiff sued the successor law firm for declaratory relief over the settlement proceeds. Plaintiff argued that it spent much more time on the case while defendant firm relied upon a clause in the plaintiff’s fee agreement which provided that upon termination by the client, plaintiff firm would have a lien on any recovery based upon a $400 an hour rate for all time spent.