FOURTH D I VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, RA Y, and M CM I LLI A N

, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s /

M ay 6, 2015



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 5 A0 57 8 . TOLSON et al . v . SISTRUNK et al

.

B A R N E S , Pres i d i n g J ud g e.

Th i s cas e in v o l v es a d i sp u t e b et w een co u n sel ov er t h e v al i di t y o f an at t o rn ey ’ s

l i en fi l ed p urs u an t t o OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (b ) an d t he ap p o rt i o n m en t o f fees u n d er t h e

l i en . Fo l l o w i ng an ev i den t i ary h eari n g

, t h e tri al co u rt ap p o rt i o n ed 3 0 p ercen t o f t h e

at t o rn ey ’ s fees to Co ch ran

, Ch erry

, Gi v en s

, Sm it h & Si s t ru n k

, P.C. (t he “ Co ch ran

Fi rm ”), co ncl u d i n g t hat i t was en t it l ed t o 2 5 p ercen t o f t h e fees fo r o ri g i n at i n g t h e

cas e an d 5 p ercen t o f t h e fees fo r t h e pre-s u i t l eg al wo rk i t p erfo rm ed

. Au d rey To l so n

an d t h e To l s on Fi rm

, P.C. (co l l ect i vel y

, “ To ls o n ”) ap p eal t h e t ri al co urt ’ s fee award

,

arg u i n g t h at t h e a t t o r n ey ’ s l i en fi l ed b y t h e Co ch ran Fi rm w as i n v al i d an d t h at t h e

fi rm s h o u l d n o t hav e b een award ed a p ercen t ag e o f th e fees fo r ori g i n at i n g t h e cas e.

To l s o n al s o arg u es t h at t h ere was i n s u ffi ci en t ev i d en ce t o su p p o rt t h e t ri a l co urt ’ s

award o f 5 p ercen t o f t he fees t o t h e Co ch ran Fi rm fo r i t s p re-t ri al l eg al wo rk

.Fo r th e reas o ns di s cu s sed b el o w, we co n cl u d e t hat t h e at to rn ey ’ s li en fi l ed by

t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

was v al i d an d t h at t h ere was ev id en ce to s u p p o rt th e t ri al co urt ’ s

award o f 5 p ercen t o f t h e fees t o th e fi rm fo r i t s pre-t ri a l l e g a l w o rk

. Ho wev er, we

al s o co n cl u d e t h at th e t r i a l c o u r t e rred i n award i n g t he Co ch ran Fi rm 25 p ercen t o f

t h e fees fo r o ri g i n at i n g t h e cas e, an d we t h erefo re rev ers e t h at po rt i o n o f t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s fee award an d rem an d wi t h th e d irect i o n t h at t h o s e fees i n s t ead b e d i s t ri b u t ed

t o To ls o n

.

Th e v al i di t y an d en fo rceab i l i t y o f an at t o rn ey ’ s l i en

, an d th e am o u n t o f fees to

award th e at t o rn ey en fo rci n g t h e l i en

, are m at t ers fo r t h e t ri a l c o u r t t o d eci d e. See

W o o d s v. Jo n es , 3 0 5 Ga. Ap p. 3 4 9 , 3 5 3 (3 ) (6 9 9 SE2 d 56 7 ) (2 0 1 0 ). W here t h e t ri al

co u rt i s t h e fact fi n d er, we co n s t ru e th e ev id en ce i n t he l i gh t m o s t fav o rab le t o s u p p o rt

t h e c o u r t ’s ju d g m en t an d wi ll u p h o l d t h e co u rt ’ s fact u al fi n d i n g s o n ap p eal i f t h ere

i s an y ev i d en c e t o s u p p o rt t h em

. See McRa e, S t eg a l l

, Peek, Ha r ma n

, S

mi t h &

Ma n n i n g, LLP v. Ga

. Fa r m Bu r ea u Mu t

. In s

. Co

. , 3 1 6 Ga. Ap p

. 5 2 6 (7 29 SE2 d 6 4 9 )

(2 0 1 2) (h erei n aft er “

McRa e ”); Ca n n o n v. W

es l ey Pl a n t a ti o n A

p ar t men t s

, 2 5 6 Ga.

Ap p

. 2 4 4

, 2 4 6 -2 4 7 (2 ) (5 6 8 SE2 d 13 7 ) (2 0 02 ). Ho wev er, “ [t ] h e p l ai n l eg al erro r

s t an d ard o f rev i ew ap p l i es wh ere t h e ap pel l at e co u rt d et erm i n es th at t h e i s s u e was o f

2l aw, n ot fact .” (Ci t at i o n an d p u n c t u at i o n o m i t ted .) McRa e

, 3 16 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 2 6.

M i n d fu l o f t h es e p ri n ci p l es

, we t u rn t o t h e reco rd i n t h e p res en t cas e.

Co n st ru ed i n f

a v o r o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ju d g m en t

, th e reco rd refl ect s t h at

Si s t ru n k

, Lam

b ert i

, an d W i l l i am s p art n ered w i t h t he n at i o n al law fi rm fo u n d ed by

J o h n ny Co ch ran an d c urren t ly o p erat e t h e A t l an t a b ran ch of t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

. In

Oct o b er 2 0 0 9

, wh en h i s wi fe di ed aft er u n d erg o i n g g as t ri c b y p as s s u rg ery

, Qu i n cy

Bry an t co n t act ed t h e Co ch ran Fi rm t o d i s cu ss t h e p o s s ib i l i ty of a m ed i cal m al p ract i ce

cl ai m

. Bry an t kn ew o f t h e n at io n al rep u t at i o n o f J o hn n y Co ch ran an d was en co u rag ed

b y h i s m o t h er-i n -l aw t o co n t act t h e A t l an ta b ran ch of th e fi rm Co ch ran h ad fo u n d ed

.

Fo l l o wi ng an i n i t ial co n s u l t at i on wi t h To l s o n , wh o was an as s o ci at e at th e Co ch ran

Fi rm

, Bry an t h ired th e fi rm t o i nv es t i g at e an d p u rs u e a p o t en t i al m ed i cal m al p ract i ce

cl ai m ag ai ns t h is wi fe ’s d o c t o r s

. Bry an t s ig n ed a co n t i n g en cy fee ag reem en t in

Oct o b er 2 0 0 9

, ag reei n g t h at t h e Co c h r an Fi rm wo u ld recei ve 4 5 p ercen t o f an y

reco v ery as i t s fee an d wo u l d b e rei m b urs ed fo r i t s ex p en s es i n cu rred i n i n v es t i g at i n g

an d prep ari n g th e cas e. Th e ag reem en t di d no t s p eci fy h ow t h e Co ch ran Fi rm wo u ld

b e p ai d i f t h e fi rm

was d i s ch arg ed b efo re an y reco v ery was o b t ai n ed

.

Ov er t he nex t ap p r o x i m at el y 1 9 m o n th s

, th e Co ch ran Fi rm i n v es t i g at ed an d

d ev el o p ed Bry an t ’ s cas e. Th e Co ch ran Fi rm p ro cu red t h e rel ev an t m ed i cal reco rd s

,

3res earch ed m ed i cal i ss ues rel at i n g t o th e care an d treat m en t of Bry an t ’ s wi fe,

co n su l t ed wi t h th ree p o t en t i al ex p ert s

, d ev el o ped a t h eo ry o f t he cas e, an d d raft ed a

co m p l ai n t

. Th e Co ch ran Fi rm s p en t $ 8 ,8 0 5 .5 0 o n it s pre-s u i t l eg al wo rk

. To l s o n was

as s i g n ed t o th e B ry an t m at t er an d p erfo rm ed “ t h e wo rk u p o f t h e cas e” u n d er t h e

d i rect i o n an d s u p erv is i o n of p art n er Lam b ert i

, an d To ls o n s erv ed as Bry an t ’ s p ri m ary

co n tact at t h e fi rm

.

To l s on res i g n ed fro m t he Co ch ran Fi rm b y em ai l on M ay 9

, 2 0 1 1

. Th e p rev i ou s

d ay

, T o l s o n h ad co n t act ed a n u m b er o f t h e fi rm ’ s cl i en t s wi t h wh om s h e h ad cl o s el y

wo rk ed

, i n cl u d i n g Bry an t

, an d ad v i s ed th em t h at s he was l eav i n g t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

an d t h at t h ey wo u l d n eed t o ch o o s e wh et h er t o a l l o w h er to rep res en t t h em g o i n g

fo rward o r t o hav e t h e Co ch ran Fi rm co n t in u e t o rep res en t t h em

. To l s on co u l d n ot

recal l wh et h er s h e t o l d Bry an t an d th e o t h er cl i en t s o n t hat d at e t h at

, i f th ey ch o se to

d i s ch arg e t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

, t h ey m i g h t b e l i ab l e fo r t h e fees an d ex p en s es t h at t h e

fi rm h ad al read y i n cu rred

. Du ri n g h i s co n v ers at i o n wi t h To l s o n

, Bry an t d eci d ed t h at

h e wan t ed h er t o co n t i n u e t o rep res en t h i m rat h er t h an t he Co ch ran Fi rm

. In h er M ay

9 t h res i g n at i o n em ai l

, To l s o n i n f o r m ed th e Co ch ran Fi rm o f h er co n t act wi t h t h e

cl i en ts an d o f t h e d eci si o n b y s ev eral o f t h em

t o b e rep res en t ed b y

h er.

4As s o ci at es at t he Co ch ran Fi rm were co m p en s at ed fo r t hei r wo rk b y recei v i n g

a p ercen t ag e o f an y reco very o b t ai n ed o nce t h e c a s e was res o l v ed

. T o l s o n d i d n ot

recei v e an y p ay fro m t he Co ch ran Fi rm fo r h er wo rk o n t h e Bry an t m at t er b efo re o r

aft er h er res i g nat i o n

.

Aft er To l so n ’ s res i g n at io n

, Bry an t co n t act ed t h e Co ch r a n F i r m

, te r m i na t i n g t h e

fi rm ’ s rep res en t at i o n an d req u es t i n g t h a t h i s cas e fi l e b e tran s ferred t o To l s o n

. He

al s o en t ered in to a co n ti n g en cy fee ag reem en t wi t h T o l s o n an d h er fi rm u nd er wh i ch

t h ey wo ul d recei v e a fee rep res en t i n g 4 0 p ercen t o f an y fu tu re reco v ery

.

In J u l y 20 1 1

, To l s o n as s o ci at ed th e p ers o n al i n j u ry f i r m o f Cas h, Kru g l er &

Fred eri ck s

, LLC (t he “ Fred eri ck s Fi rm ”) t o as s i s t h er i n th e Bry an t m at t er, an d in

Oct o b e r 2 0 1 1, To l so n an d t h e Fred eri ck s Fi rm fi led s u i t on b eh al f o f Bry an t

, as

s u rv i v i n g s p o u s e an d ad m i n is t rat o r o f h i s wi fe’ s es t at e, ag ai n s t s ev eral d efen d an t s fo r

m ed i cal m al p ract i ce i n t h e St at e C o u r t o f D eKal b Co u n t y

. Th e Fred eri ck s Fi rm

as s u m e d t he ro l e of lead co u n s el

, wi t h Al wy n Fred eri ck s perfo rm i n g th e “ v as t

m ajo ri ty o f t h e wo rk ” o n t h e cas e, i ncl u d i n g t h e d raft i n g o f t h e p l ead i n g s an d

d i s co v ery an d co n du ct i n g m u l t i p le d ep o s it i o n s

. In p ro s ecu t i n g t h e cas e, To l so n

i n cu rred $ 3,0 0 2 .0 2 i n ex pen s es

, wh i l e t he Fred eri ck s Fi rm i n cu rred $ 8 3

, 2 9 8 .3 0.

Becau s e t h e Fred eri ck s Fi rm w a s p erfo rm i n g a m ajo ri t y o f th e wo rk an d i n cu rri n g

5m o st o f th e ex p en s es

, To l so n u l t i m at el y ag reed t o s p l i t t h e co n t i n g en cy fee wi t h t h e

F r e d e r i ck s Fi rm o n a 6 0 / 4 0 b as i s

, wi th t h e Fred eri ck s Fi rm recei v i ng 6 0 p ercen t o f

t h e fee an d To l s on recei vi n g 4 0 p ercen t

.

In No vem

b er 2 0 1 2, t h e Co ch ran Fi rm fi l ed i t s n o t i ce o f at t o rn ey ’ s l i en i n t h e

Bry an t cas e fo r p ay m en t o f t he $ 8 ,8 0 5.5 0 i n ex p en s es i t h a d i n cu rred an d fo r a

reas on ab l e p o rt i o n o f t h e at t o rn ey ’ s fees un d er q u an t u m m e r u i t if t h ere was a

reco v ery fo r Bry an t

. In ad d i t io n t o fi l i n g i t s at t orn ey ’ s l i en n o t ice i n t h e Bry an t cas e,

t h e Co ch ran Fi rm fi l ed a s ep arat e act i o n ag ai n s t T ol so n i n M ay 2 0 13 i n t h e Su p eri o r

Co u rt of Fu l t o n Co u n t y

, al l eg i n g t h at To l s on h ad i m p ro p erl y p ro cu red cl i en t s

,

i n cl u d i n g Bry an t

, w h i l e s he was s t i l l an as s oci at e at t h e f i r m ( t h e “ Fu l t o n Co u n t y

act i on ”). Th e Co ch ran Fi rm as s e r t e d m u l t i pl e cl ai m s ag ai n s t To l s o n i n t h e Fu l t o n

Co u n t y act i o n

, i n cl u di n g b reach o f t h e d u t y o f l o y al t y

, t o rt i o u s i n t erferen ce wi th

co n tract

, an d un

ju s t en ri ch m en t

, an d t h e fi rm s o u g h t co m p en s at o r y a n d p u n i t i v e

d am ag es fro m h er. Th e cu rren t s t at u s o f t h e Fu l t o n Co u n t y act i o n i s un cl ear fro m t h e

reco rd

. 1

1 Th e t ri al co u rt i n t h e p res en t cas e ru l ed t h at b ecau s e t h e n o t ice of at t o rn ey ’ s

l i en was fi l ed b efo re t h e Fu l t o n Co u n t y act i o n w a s f i l ed

, t he p res en t cas e was fi l ed

fi rs t fo r p u rp os es of OCGA § § 9 -2 -5 (a) an d 9 -2 -4 4 an d w as n o t s u bject to ab at em en t

. To l s o n d o es n o t ch al l en ge t h at ru l i n g o n ap p eal

.

6In M ay 2 0 1 4

, s ev eral d efen d an t s s et t l ed t h e cas e w i t h Bry an t fo r $ 2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0,

an d $ 80 0 ,0 0 0 o f t h e p r o ceed s were d is b u rs ed as at t o rn ey fees t o To l s o n an d t h e

Fred eri ck s Fi rm

. Aft er l earn i n g o f t h e s et t lem en t

, t he Co ch ran Fi rm fi l ed a m o t i o n in

Ap ri l 2 0 1 4 i n t h e Bry an t cas e t o en fo rce i t s l i en an d o b t ai n a p o rt io n o f t h e $ 8 0 0 ,0 0 0

i n at t o rn ey

fees

.

Befo re t h e t ri al co u rt ru led o n t h e Co ch ran Fi rm ’ s m o t io n t o en fo rce t h e l i en

,

To l s o n an d t h e Fred e ri ck s Fi rm d i s m i s s ed t h e cas e wi t h p reju d i ce, l ead i n g t h e

Co ch ran Fi rm t o m o v e to v acat e t h e d i s m i s s al in J u n e 2 01 4

. In Au g u s t 20 1 4

, t h e t ri al

co u rt co n d u ct ed a h eari n g o n t h e Co ch ran Fi rm ’ s m o t i o n s t o v acat e t h e d i s m i s s al an d

t o en fo rce t h e l i en

. Th e t ri al co u r t r u l ed t h at t he l i en was v al id

, t h at t he d i s m i s s al

wo u l d b e v acat ed

, an d t h at a s ep arat e ev i d en t i ary h eari n g w ou l d b e co n du ct ed to

d et erm i n e th e am ou n t o f at to rn ey ’ s fees an d ex pen s es t h at s h o u l d b e ap p o rt i o n ed to

t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

. At th e t ri al co u rt ’ s d i rect i on

, t h e d i s p u t ed at t o rn ey fees were h el d

i n t he Fred eri ck s Fi rm ’ s cl i en t t ru st acco u n t p en d i n g res o lu ti o n o f t h e m at t er.

Lat er t hat m o n t h

, t h e t ri al co u rt co n d u ct ed an ev id en t i ary h eari n g t o d et erm i n e

h o w m u ch o f t h e fees s ho u l d b e award ed t o t h e Co ch ran Fi rm p u rs uan t t o i t s

at t o rn ey ’ s l i en

. Th e p art ies ag reed t h at an y fees award ed t o t h e Co ch ran Fi rm wo u ld

b e p ai d ou t o f t h e fees t h at wo u l d h a v e b een d is t ri bu t ed t o To ls o n u n d er h er

7c o n t i n g en cy fee ag reem en t w i t h Bry an t rat h er t h an ou t o f th e fees p ai d t o t h e

Fred eri ck s Fi rm

.

Aft er th e ev i den t i ary h eari n g

, t h e t ri al co u rt ap po rt i o n ed t h e at t o rn ey ’ s fees as

fo l l o w s : $4 8 0 ,0 0 0 (6 0 p ercen t ) t o t h e Fred eri ck s Fi rm ; $ 2 4 0,0 0 0 (3 0 percen t ) t o t h e

Co ch ran Fi rm ; an d $8 0 ,0 0 0 (1 0 p ercen t ) t o To ls o n

. In ap p o rt i o n i n g 3 0 p ercen t o f t h e

at t o rn ey ’ s fees t o t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

, t h e t ri al co u rt co n cl u ded t h at u n d er t h e d o ct ri n e

o f q u an tu m m eru i t

, th e fi rm s h o u ld recei v e 2 5 p ercen t o f t h e fees ($ 20 0

, 0 0 0 ) fo r

o ri g i nat in g t he cas e. Th e t ri al co u rt fu rt her co n cl u ded t h at t he Co ch ran Fi rm s h o u ld

recei v e an ad d it i o n al 5 p ercen t of t h e fees ($ 4 0 ,0 00 ) fo r th e p re-s u i t leg al wo rk i t h ad

p erfo rm ed fo r Bry an t

. Ad d i t io n al l y

, t h e tri al co u rt award ed t h e Co ch ran Fi rm t h e

$ 8 ,8 0 5 .5 0 i n ex pen s es i t h ad i ncu rred as p art o f i ts p re-s u i t wo rk

. 2

1

. In h er fi rs t en u m erat i on o f erro r, To l s o n co n ten d s t h at t h e t r i al co u rt erred

i n co n cl u d i n g t h at t he at t o rn ey ’ s l ien fi l ed b y t he Co ch ran Fi rm was val i d

. A cco rd i n g

t o To l s o n

, t h e Co ch ran Fi rm was n o t en t i t l ed t o fi l e an at t o rn ey ’ s l i en b ecau s e t h e

fi rm p erfo rm ed o n ly p re-s u i t l eg al wo rk an d was d i s ch arg ed b y Bry an t b efo r e t h e

l aws u i t was fi led . W e are u n pers u ad ed

.

2 To l s o n h ad co n ced ed t h at t h e Co ch ran Fi rm was en ti t led t o t h e $ 8 ,8 0 5 .3 0 in

ex p en s es i t h ad i n cu rred

.

8OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4

, w h ich ad d r e s s e s th e d i fferen t t y pes o f at t o rn ey ’ s l i en s

en fo rceab l e u n d er Geo rg i a l aw, p ro v i d es i n p art :

(b ) Up o n act io n s

, ju d g m en t s

, an d d ecrees fo r m o n ey, a t t orn ey s at l aw

s h al l h av e a li en s u p eri o r t o al l l i en s ex cep t t ax l i en s; an d n o p ers o n

s h al l b e at l ib ert y t o s at i s fy s uch an act i on

, ju d g m en t

, o r d ecree u n t il th e

l i en o r cl ai m o f t h e at t o rn ey fo r h i s fees i s fu l l y s at i sfi ed

. At t o r n e y s at

l aw sh al l h av e t h e sam e ri g h t an d po wer ov e r t h e a c t i on s

, ju d g m en t s

,

an d d ecrees to en fo rce th ei r l i en s as t h ei r cl i en t s h ad o r m ay hav e fo r th e

am o u nt d ue t h ereo n t o t h em

.

(c) Up on al l a c t i o n s fo r t h e reco v ery o f real o r p ers o n al p ro pert y an d

u p o n al l ju d g m en t s o r decrees fo r t h e reco v ery of t h e sam e, at t o rn ey s at

l aw s h al l h av e a l i en fo r t h ei r fees on t h e p ro p ert y reco v ered s u peri o r t o

al l l i en s ex cep t l i en s fo r t ax es

, wh i ch m ay be en fo rced b y m o rt g ag e an d

fo recl o s u re b y t he at t orn ey s at l aw or t h ei r l a w f u l rep res en t at i ves as

l i en s o n p e r s o n a l p ro p ert y an d real es tat e are en fo rced

. Th e pro p ert y

reco vered s h al l rem ai n su b ject t o t h e l i en s u n l es s t ran sferred t o b o na

fi de p urch as ers w it ho u t n o t i ce.

( d ) I f an at t o rn ey at l aw fi l es h is as s ert i o n cl ai m i n g a l i en on pro p ert y

reco vered i n an act i on in s t i t u t ed b y h i m

, wi t h in 3 0 d ay s aft er a reco v ery

o f t h e s am e, h i s l i en s h al l b i n d al l p ers o ns

.

“ An at t o rn ey ’ s l i en o n a cl ai m fo r m o n ey

, i .e., a ch arg i ng l i en

, is t h e eq u i t ab l e

ri gh t o f t he at t orn ey

t o reco v er h i s fees an d co st s d u e hi m fo r h is s erv i ces

, an d m ay

9b e s at i sfi ed o u t o f t h e ju d g m en t o b t ai n ed b y h i s p ro fes s i on al serv i ces .” (Ci tat i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) McRa e

, 31 6 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 2 8 . An at to rn ey ’ s l i en , l i k e t h e o n e

at is s ue h ere t h at w as p l aced o n a t o rt act i o n fo r m o net ary d am ag es

, i s a l i en o n a

cl ai m fo r m o n ey an d t h u s co n st i t u tes a ch arg i n g l i en

. S e e i d

. I n Geo rg i a, ch arg i n g

l i en s are co n t ro l led b y

OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (b ). McRa e , 3 16 Ga. Ap p . at 5 2 8

.

Co n trary t o To l so n ’ s arg u m en t

, OC G A § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (b ) affo rd s p ro t ect i o n to

fo rm er co u n s el wh o p erfo rm ed l eg al w o rk fo r a cl i en t i n a n t i c i p a t io n o f fi l i n g a

l a w s u i t

, e v en i f s u cces s o r co u n s el u l t i m at el y fi led t h e s u i t

. By i t s p lai n l an g u ag e,

O CGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (b ) ap p l i es wi t h ou t l i m i t at i o n to “ at t o rn ey s at l aw” an d en t i t l e s

t h em t o l i en s u p on “ act i o n s

, ju d g m en t s an d d ecrees fo r m on ey .” It i s t ru e t hat t h e l i en

d o es n o t at t ach un t i l a l aws ui t h as b een fi l ed o n t h e cl i e n t ’ s beh al f. See Ho we &

As s o c. v. Da n i el

s

, 2 8 0 G a. 8 0 3

, 8 0 4 (6 3 1 SE2 d 3 5 6 ) (2 0 0 6 ); S t eel e v. Ci nci n n a t i In s

.

Co

. , 1 7 1 Ga. Ap p

. 4 9 9

, 50 0 -5 0 1 (3 ) ( 3 2 0 S E2 d 20 3 ) (1 9 8 4). Bu t n ot h i n g i n t h e

s t at u to ry l an gu ag e res t ri ct s i t s ap p l i cat i o n to a li m i ted cl as s o f at t o rn ey s wh o wo rk ed

o n t h e l aws u i t wh en i t was fi l ed

. Rat h er, OC G A § 1 5

- 1 9

- 1 4 (b ) ap p l i es n o n

res t ri ct i v el y t o “ at t o rn ey s at l a w ” an d t h u s i s b ro ad en o u g h to en co m p as s t h o s e

at t o rn ey s wh o co n d u ct ed l eg al wo rk fo r a cl i en t i n an t i ci p at io n o f a l aws u i t t h at

u l t i m at el y i s fi l ed o n b eh al f o f t h e cl i en t b y a d i fferen t at t o r n e y. An y o th er res u l t

10wo u l d b e i n co n s i s t en t wi t h t h e p ri n ci p l e th at l i en s ex i st t o en su re t h at an at t o rn ey i s

co m p en s at ed fo r t h e “ fru i t s o f [h i s ] l ab or an d s k i l l

. . . wh et h er real i zed by ju d g m en t

o r d ecree, o r b y v i rt u e o f an award

, o r i n an y ot h er way

, s o l o n g as t h ey are t h e res u l t

o f hi s ex ert i o n s .” (Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed .) Reco b a v. S t a t e

, 1 6 7 Ga. Ap p.

4 4 7

, 4 4 9 (3 0 6 SE2 d 7 1 3 ) (1 9 8 3 ), o v erru l ed i n p art on o t h er g ro u n d s as s t at ed i n In

t h e In t er es t

o f E. N. R. , 3 23 Ga. Ap p . 8 1 5 , 8 1 7 , n .6 (7 4 8 SE2 d 2 9 3 ) (2 0 1 3 ).

To l s on

, h o wev er, em

ph as i zes t h at we h av e rep eat ed l y s t at ed t h at OCGA § 1 5

-

1 9 -1 4 “ i s i n d ero g at io n o f t h e co m m o n law, an d i s t o b e s tri ct l y co n s t ru ed .” (Ci t at i o n

an d p un ct u at i o n om it t ed .) St ee l e

, 1 7 1 Ga. A p p

. at 5 0 1 (3 ). Yet

, t h e ru l e o f s t ri ct

co n st ru ct i o n d o es no t m ean t h at a s t at ut e sh o ul d b e i n t erp ret ed s o n arro wl y as to

d efeat t h e leg i s l at i ve i n t en t as ev i d en ced b y t h e p l ai n lan g u ag e o f t h e s tat u t e. See

Amo en a Co r

p

. v. St r ickl a n d

, 24 8 Ga. 4 9 6, 5 0 0 (3 ) (2 8 3 SE2 d 8 9 4 ) (1 9 81 ). Th e n o n

res t ri ct i v e l an g u ag e o f OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (b ) d o es no t di fferen ti at e bet ween cl as s es

o f “ at t o rn ey s at l aw” wh o h av e wo rk ed o n a m at t er fo r a cl i en t w h o can fi l e an d

en fo rce a l i en on an act i o n fo r m o n e y, a n d w e d ecl i n e t o en g raft s u ch a l i m i t at i o n

u p o n t h e s t at u t e. Se e Fi r s t Na t

. Ba n k of Ames

, Io wa v. In n o va t i ve Cl i n i ca l &

Co n s u l t in g S

vcs

. , 2 8 0 Ga. A p p. 3 3 7 (6 3 4 SE2 d 8 8 ) (2 0 0 6 ) (co u rt s “ m ay n o t co n s t ri ct

11[a] s u bs ect i o n

. . . o f t h e s tat u t e b y en graft i n g u p o n i t l i m i tat i o n s t h e l eg is l at u re h as

n o t en act ed ”).

To l s on al s o rel ies u p o n a d ifferen t s u bs ect i o n o f t h e a t t o rn ey ’ s l i en s t at u t e,

O C G A § 15 -1 9 -1 4 (d ), i n an effo rt t o su p po rt h er arg u m en t t h at at to rn ey s wh o

p erfo rm p re-s ui t l eg al wo rk fo r a cl i en t can n o t o b t ai n a l ien o n an act i o n fo r m o n ey

t h at u lt i m at el y was fi l ed b y an o t h er at t o rn ey

. To ls o n ’ s rel i an ce o n OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4

(d ) i s m i s p l aced b ecau s e su b s ect i o n (d ) o n l y ap pl i es t o l i en s “ o n p ro p ert y reco v ered ,”

an d “ pro pert y ” i n t h is co n t ex t d o es n o t m ean “ m o ney ” r e c o v e r e d i n an act i o n fo r

d am ag es

, as m ad e cl ear wh en s u b s ect i o n (d ) i s read i n co n ju n ct i o n wi t h s u b s ect i on s

(b ) an d (c) o f t h e s t at u t e.

A fu n d am en t al ru l e o f st at ut o ry co n st ru ct io n is th at t h e i n t erp ret at i o n “ o f

l an g u ag e an d wo rd s u s e d i n o n e p art o f th e s t at u t e m us t b e i n t h e l i g h t o f t h e

l eg i s lat i v e i nt en t as fo u n d in t h e s t a t u t e as a wh ol e.” (Ci t at i o n an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed .) Ben n et t El ec. Co

. v. S p ea r s

, 1 88 Ga. Ap p

. 5 0 2

, 5 0 3 (3 7 3 SE2 d 2 8 6) (1 9 8 8 ).

“ Part i cu l ar wo rd s o f s tat u t es are n o t i n t erp ret ed in i s o l at i o n ; i n s tead

, co urt s m u s t

co n st ru e a s t at u te t o g i v e s en s i b l e an d i n t el l i g en t effect t o al l o f i t s p r o v is i o n s [.] ”

(Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) U.S

. Ba n k Na t. As sn v. Go r d

on , 2 8 9 Ga. 1 2 , 1 4

(4 ) (7 0 9 SE2 d 2 5 8 ) (2 0 1 1). W h en wo rd s i n a s tat u te are rep eat ed i n “ s u b s eq u en t p art s

12o f t h e s am e st at u t e,” we p res u m e t h a t t h e l eg i sl at ure i n t en d ed fo r t h e wo rd s “ t o b e

u n d ers t o o d i n t h e s am e s en s e.” (Ci t at io n an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i t ted .) Bo t t s v.

S o u t h ea s t er n Pi

pe-Li n e Co

. , 1 9 0 Ga. 6 8 9

, 7 0 2 (1 0 SE2 d 3 7 5 ) (1 9 40 ). Co n v ers el y

,

“ [i ] t i s g en eral ly p res u m ed t hat [t h e l eg i sl at ure] act s inte n ti o n al l y an d pu rp o s el y wh en

i t i n cl u des p art i cu l ar l an g u ag e i n o n e s ect i o n o f a st at u t e b u t o m i t s i t i n an o t h er.”

(Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t ted .) B FP v. Res o l u t i o n Tr u st Co r p

. , 5 11 U.S. 5 3 1

, 5 3 7

(1 1 4 SCt . 1 7 5 7

, 1 2 8 LE2 d 5 56 ) (1 9 9 4 ).

W h en t h es e ru les o f s t at u t o ry co n st ru ct i o n are ap p li ed in t h e p res en t cas e, i t i s

cl ear t h at t h e wo rd “ pro p ert y ” in s u b s ect i o n (d ) o f OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 m ean s “ real o r

p ers o n al p ro p ert y ” as referen ced i n s u b s ect i o n (c) o f t h e s t at u t e rat her th an “ m o n ey ”

as referen ced i n s u b s ect i o n (b ). See H o d n et t v. Bo n n er

, 1 0 7 G a. 4 5 2, 45 5 (3 3 SE 4 1 6 )

(1 8 9 9) (n o t i n g t h at t he l i en p ro v i d ed fo r i n Ci v i l Co d e 1 8 9 5

, § 2 8 1 4 (3 ) an d (4 ), a

p red eces s o r st at u t e t o OCGA § 1 5 -1 9-1 4 (c) an d (d ), “ d oes n o t ari s e u n l es s t h ere h as

b een a j u d g m en t

. . . i n wh i ch p ro p ert y

, ei t h er r ea l o r p er s o n a l

, i s reco v ered ”)

(em p h as i s s u p p l i ed ). In d eed

, a fed eral co u rt ad d res s in g t h e s am e q u es t i o n h as

t h o ro u g hl y an d p ers u as i vel y ex p l ai n ed t h e in t errel at io n b et ween s u b s ect i o ns (b ), (c),

an d (d ) o f OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 :

13In t h i s cas e, t h e l eg i s l at ure, i n s u b sect i o n (c), d eal t wi t h l i en s ari s i n g i n

act i o n s fo r “ reco v ery o f real o r pers on al p ro p ert y ,” an d t al ked ab o u t th e

n at u re o f t h e atto rn ey ’ s l i en at t ach i n g to t h e “ p ro p ert y reco v ered ” ari s i n g

fro m s u ch act i o n s

. In co n t ras t

, s u b s ect i o n (b ) d eal s wi t h l i en s ari s i n g i n

act i o n s “ fo r m o ney ,” an d d i s cu s s es th e s l i g ht l y d i fferen t nat u re of t h o s e

l i en s

. Su b s ect i on (d ), wh i ch i s at i s s u e h ere, l i k e s u b sect i on (c), s p eak s

o n l y o f “ p ro p ert y reco v ered

. ” It m ak es n o m en ti o n of m o n ey

. Read i n g

t h e l an g u ag e o f su b sect i o n (d ) i n co n t ex t

– as i t m u s t

– t h e Co u rt

co n cl u d es t h at i t ap p l ies on l y t o at t o rn ey ’ s li en s ari s i n g u n d er s u b s ect i o n

(c) o f th e s t at u te: t h o s e ari s i n g i n act io n s fo r t h e rec o v e r y o f real o r

p ers on al p ro p ert y

. It d o es n o t ap p l y t o l i en s ari s i n g un d er su b sect io n (b ),

wh i ch co n cern s o n l y “ act i o n s

, ju d g m en t s

, an d d ecrees fo r m o n ey .” If th e

l eg i s l at u re had i n t en d ed s u b s ect i o n (d ) t o a p p l y t o s u b s ect i o n (b ) i n

ad d i ti o n t o s u b s ect i o n (c), it co u l d h av e eas il y o m i tt ed t h e p h ras e “ o n

p ro p ert y reco v ered

. ”

In ad d i t i o n, s ub s ect i o n (d ) qu al i fi es th e l ien defi n ed i n s u b s ect i o n

(c), bu t n o t t h at i n s u bs ect i o n (b ). Su b s ect i o n (c)’s l as t s en t en ce s t at es

t h a t “ [ t ]h e pro pert y reco v ered sh al l rem ai n s u b ject t o t h e l ien s un l es s

t ran s ferred t o b o n a fi d e p u rch as ers wi th ou t n o t ice.” Su b s e c t i o n (d ),

h o wev er, qu al i fi es th i s p ro v i s i o n b y s ay i n g t h at

, i f t h e at t o rn ey fi les h i s

l i en o n p ro p ert y reco v ered

, t h e “ l ien s h al l b i n d al l p ers o n s .” Su b s ect i o n

(b ) co n t ai ns no an al o g ou s p ro v i s i o n t o wh i ch su b s ect io n (d )’ s q u al ifi er

l o g i cal l y co u l d b e s ai d t o at t ach

.

. . . A p p l y i n g set tl ed ru l es o f s t at u t o ry co n s t ru ct i o n

, t h e Co u rt

h o l d s t h at s u b s ect i on (d ) o f O C G A 1 5

- 1 9 -1 4

. . . ap p l i es o n l y t o li en s

14a ri s i n g u n d er s u b s ect io n (c) o f t h at st at ut e. It do es n ot co n cer n l i e n s

ari s i ng i n act io n s fo r m o n ey [u n der s ub s ect i o n (b )]

.

In r e Di a mo n d M

f g

. Co

. , 1 2 3 B. R. 1 25

, 12 8 -1 2 9 (S.D. Ga. 19 9 0), a f f’ d wi t h o ut

o p i n i o n b y Mo o r e v. D i a m o nd Mf g

. Co

. , 9 5 9 F.2 d 9 7 2 (1 1 t h Ci r. Ga. 1 99 2 ). 3 See al s o

In r e Ch ewn i ng & Fr ey S

ecu r i t y

, 3 2 8 B. R. 8 9 9

, 9 2 2 (Ban kr. N .D. G a. 20 0 5). Fo r t h e

s am e reas o n s art i cu l at ed b y t h e fed eral co u rt i n In re Di a mo n d M f g

. Co

. , we co n cl u d e

t h at OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (d ) h as n o b eari n g o n t h e i n s t an t cas e i n v o l v in g a l i en ari s i n g

o u t o f an act io n fo r m o n ey u nd er OCGA § 1 5-1 9 -1 4 (b ). 4

In s u m

, we co n cl u d e t h at u n d e r O CGA § 1 5 -1 9-1 4 (b ), p red eces so r co u n s el

wh o perfo rm ed l eg al wo rk fo r a cl i en t in d ev el o p i ng a l aws u i t i s au t h ori zed t o p l ace

a l i en o n t h e s ui t wh en i t i s fi l ed fo r t h e cl i en t by s u cces s o r co u n s el

. Th e tri al co u rt

t h erefo re co m

m i t t ed n o erro r i n co n cl u d i ng t h at t h e Co ch ran Fi rm was au t h ori zed to

3 “ Deci s i o n s o f fed eral co u rt s are n o t b i n d i n g au t ho ri t y o n th i s co u rt

, b u t t h ei r

reas o n i n g m ay be p ers u as i v e[.] ” Ba s ki n v. Geo r g i a Dep t. o

f Co r rect i o n s

, 2 7 2 Ga.

Ap p . 3 5 5 , 3 5 9 (3 ) (6 1 2 SE2 d 5 6 5 ) (2 0 0 5 ).

4 To t h e ex ten t t hat Ra ms ey v. S u mn er , 2 1 1 Ga. Ap p

. 2 02

, 20 4 (3 ) (4 3 8 SE2 d

6 7 6 ) (1 99 3 ), s u g g es t s t h at OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (d ) ap p l ies t o a m on et ary set t lem en t in

a s u i t fo r d am ag es

, t h at l an g u ag e i s no n -b in d i ng d i ct a. See No r t h Dr u id Dev. v. Po s t

, B u ckl ey, S

ch u h & Jer n i

g an

, 3 3 0 Ga. Ap p

. 4 32

, 4 37 (1 ), n .6 (7 67 SE2 d 2 9) (2 0 1 4 )

(n o t i ng th at “ s tat em en t s i n an o p i n i o n co n cern i ng s o m e ru l e o f l a w o r l eg al

p ro p os i t i on n o t n eces s ari l y i n vo l v ed n o r es s en t ial to d et erm i n at i o n of t h e cas e i n h an d

are n o n b i n d in g d i ct a”) (ci t at i o n an d p un ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

15fi le an at t o rn ey ’ s li en o n t h e m ed i cal m al p ract i ce act i o n co m m en ced b y

To l s o n an d

t h e Fred eri ck s Fi rm

.

2

. In h er s eco n d en u m erat io n o f e r r o r

, T o l s o n co n ten d s t h at ev en i f t h e

at t o rn ey ’ s l i en was val i d

, t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n d et erm i n i n g t h e am o u n t o f fees t h at

s h o u ld b e award ed t o t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

. To l s o n m a i n t ai n s t h at t h e tri al co u rt

i m p ro p erl y award ed 2 5 percen t o f th e fees t o th e Co ch ran Fi rm fo r o ri g i nat i n g t h e

cas e b ecau s e o ri g in at i o n co n ferred n o v al u e u p o n Bry an t

, an d s h e fu rt h er arg u es t h at

t h ere was i n s u ffi ci en t ev id en ce fo r t h e t ri al co u rt t o award t h e Co ch ran Fi rm 5 p ercen t

o f t h e fees fo r i t s p re-s u it l eg al wo rk

. 5

(a) W e ag ree wi t h To l so n t h a t t h e t r i al co u rt erred i n award i n g t h e Co ch ran

Fi rm 2 5 p ercen t o f t h e fees fo r i t s o ri g i n at i o n o f th e cas e. Ori g in at i o n o r p ro cu rem en t

o f a cas e i s no t a s erv i ce ren d ered o n b eh al f o f t h e cl i en t a n d d o es n o t co n fer an y

v al u e o r b en efi t u po n h i m o r h er, an d

, t h erefo re, s ho u l d n o t b e co n s i d ered b y a t ri al

5 T o ls o n al so arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt e r r e d by award in g fees t o Co ch ran

, Ch erry

, G i v en s

, Sm i t h & Si s tru n k, P.C. b ecau s e n o s u ch en t i t y ex i s t s an d t h at

, as a

res u l t, t h e co urt sh o u ld h av e m ad e t h e award “ t o t h e i n d i v id ual at t o rn ey s o n t h e cas e.”

W e d o n o t ag ree. T h ere was ev i d en ce t hat a g en eral p art n ers h i p co n s i st i n g of p art n ers

Si s t ru n k

, Lam

b ert i

, an d W i l l i am s co m

pri s ed t h e l aw fi rm t h a t r ep res en t ed Bry an t

b efo re t h e l aws u i t was fi l ed an d t h at t hey d o bu s in es s i n At l an t a as Co ch ran

, Ch erry

, Gi v en s , Sm i th & Si s t ru n k , P.C.

16co u rt in d et erm i n i n g th e am ou n t o f fees t h at o ug h t t o b e award ed t o an at t o rn ey u n d er

q u an tu m m eru it i n a l i en en fo rcem en t act i o n

.

As an i ni t i al m at t er, i t b ears rep eat i n g t h a t t h e Co ch ran Fi rm s o u g h t i t s

reco v ery o f fees i n th e co n t ex t of t he fi l i n g an d en fo rcem en t o f an at t orn ey ’ s l i en

. An

a t t o rn ey ’ s l i en u n der OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (b ) i s b as ed o n “ t he fru i t s of t h e lab o r an d

s k i l l o f t h e at to rn ey ” ex ert ed o n b eh al f o f t he cl i en t

, an d t h e l i en o n l y at t ach es t o an

act i on fo r m o n ey u p o n a s h o wi n g t hat “ leg al w o rk ” was p erfo rm ed b y t h e at t o rn ey fo r

t h e cl i en t

. Reco b a

, 1 6 7 Ga. A p p. at 4 4 9 -4 5 0

. Hen ce, t h e d et erm i n at i on o f fees u n d er

OCGA § 1 5 -1 9 -1 4 (b ) i s p red i cat ed o n t he l ab o r an d s erv i ces ren dered t o t h e cl i en t

i n v o l v ed i n t h e act i o n fo r m o n ey rat h er t han l ab o r an d s erv i ces ren d ered t o o t h er

co u ns el o r a t h i rd p art y

.

Th at t h e fo cu s s h o u l d b e o n t h e s erv i ces ren d ered t o t h e cl i en t i s fu rt h er b o rn e

o u t b y o u r cas e l aw d i s cu s s i n g t h e ap p l i cat i o n o f qu an t um m e r u i t i n t h e co n t ex t o f

at t o rn ey ’ s fees

. As w e h av e ex p l ai n ed

, i f an at t o rn ey i s d i s ch arg ed b efo re earn i n g h i s

co n tract ual co n t i n g en cy fee, h e m ay o b t ai n a reco v ery un d er q u an t u m m eru i t

. Ha l di

v. W a t so n

, 2 4 0 G a. Ap p

. 8 0 1

, 8 0 2 (2 ) (5 2 2 SE2 d 6 9 6 ) (1 9 9 9). An d o u r p reced en t

m ak es cl ear t h at wh en t h e d i sch arg ed at t o rn ey s eek s reco v ery fro m a fo rm er cl i en t

u n d er q u an t u m m eru it

, t he fees award ed t o t h e at t o rn ey s h o ul d b e d et erm i n ed b as ed

17o n t h e reas o n ab l e val u e o f t h e s erv i ces ren dered t o t h e cl i en t

. Ams t ea d v. McFa r l a n d

,

2 8 7 Ga. Ap p

. 1 3 5

, 1 3 8 (1 ) (6 5 0 SE2 d 7 3 7 ) (2 0 0 7 ). It fo l lo ws t h at if t h e d i s ch arg ed

at t o rn ey ’ s s erv i ces at i s s u e had n o v al u e t o t h e cl i en t, “ th e cl ien t h as n o ob l ig at i o n to

p ay fo r t h em ” u n d er q u an tu m m eru i t

. Ha l di , 2 4 0 Ga. Ap p . at 8 0 3 (2 ).

Fu rt herm o re

, e v e n wh ere, as h ere, th e d i s ch arg ed at to rn ey i s en t i t l ed t o s eek

reco v ery o f h i s fees fro m fo rm er co -co u ns el u n der a t h eo ry o f q uan t u m m eru i t

, 6 t h e

m eas u rem en t o f fees s t i l l m u st b e t i ed t o t h e s erv i ces t h a t were ren d ered b y t h e

d i s ch arg ed at t o rn ey t o an d fo r t h e b en efi t o f t h e cl i en t

. Th is i s m ad e cl ear b y o u r

d eci s i o n i n Ki r

s ch n er & Ven ker

, P.C. v. Ta

yl o r & Ma r ti n o , P.C.

, 2 7 7 Ga. Ap p . 5 1 2

(6 2 7 SE2 d 1 1 2 ) (2 0 0 6 ), wh i ch

, l i k e th e p res en t cas e, i n v o l v ed an at t orn ey ’ s l i en

d i s p u t e bet ween d i s ch arg ed an d cu rren t co u n s el ov er fees t h at were b ei n g h el d i n an

6 Th e g en era l r u l e i s t h at an at t o rn ey wh o en t ers i n t o a co n ti n g en cy fee

ag reem en t wi t h a cl i en t, an d wh o i s d i sch arg ed b efo re th e co n ti n g en cy o ccu rs

, m u s t

s eek rec o v e r y u n d er qu an t um m eru i t fro m th e cl ien t rat h er t h an new co u n s el

s u b s eq u en t l y ret ai n ed b y t h e cl i en t. See Ki n g v. Les s i n g er

, 2 7 6 Ga. Ap p

. 1 4 5

, 1 4 7

(6 2 2 SE2 d 3 8 1) (2 0 0 5 ). Bu t i f t h e fo rm er an d cu rren t co u n s el wo rk ed as co -co u n s el

fo r t he m u t u al b en efi t o f th e cl i en t b efo re th e fo rm er co u n s el was d i s ch arg ed

, t h en t h e

fo rm er co u ns el m ay reco v er h i s fees in q uan t u m m eru i t fro m t h e cu rren t co u n s el

. See

Ei ch h o l z La w Fi r m, P .C. v. Ta t e La w Gr ou p

, 31 0 Ga. Ap p

. 8 4 8

, 8 5 2 -8 53 (1 ) (7 1 4

SE2 d 4 1 3 ) (2 0 1 1); Ki r

sch ner & Ven ker

, P.C.

, 2 7 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 1 4

, n

. 1

. Here, b efo re

t h e Co ch ran Fi rm w as d i s ch arg ed

, b o t h t h e Co ch ran Fi rm an d To l s o n (as an as s o ci at e

at t h e fi rm ) wo rk ed o n t h e l eg al m at t er fo r t h e m u t u al b en efi t o f Bry an t

, an d t h u s t h e

Co ch ran Fi rm was en t it l ed t o reco v er i ts fees i n q u a n tu m m eru i t fro m t h e fees t h at

o t h erwi s e wo u l d h av e b een d i s t ri b u t ed t o To l so n

. See i d

.

18es cro w acco u n t aft er t h e s et t l em en t o f th e u n d erl y i ng t o rt act io n

. In t h at co n t ex t

, we

h el d th at t h e am o un t o f fees award ed u n d er t he li en t o d i s ch arg ed co u n s el s h o u l d b e

“ b as ed on t h e reas o n ab l e v al u e o f t h e s erv i ces t h at i t h ad ren d ered to th e cl i en t b efo re

b ei n g fi red .” (Em

p h as i s s u p p l ied .) Id . at 5 1 3.

In Ei c h h o l

z L a w Fi r m

, 31 0 Ga. Ap p. at 85 3 (1 ), an o t h er cas e w h ere we h el d

t h at d i s ch arg ed at t o rn ey co u ld s eek reco v ery o f fees fro m fo rm er co -co u n s el u n d er

q u an tu m m eru i t

, w e u s ed d i fferen t l an g u ag e th an Ki r s ch n er & V

en ker i n art i cu l at i n g

h o w t o m eas u re fees un d er q u an t u m m eru i t

, b u t t o t h e s am e ul ti m at e effect

. Ci t i n g to

Ki r s ch n er & Ven ker

, we h el d t h at d i s ch arg ed co u n s el co u ld reco v er fees i n q u an t u m

m eru i t fo r th e “ s erv i ces i t p ro v i d ed t o [i t s fo rm er co -co u n s el ] p u r su a nt t o t h ei r jo i nt

v en tu re” rep res en t i n g t h e cl i en t. (Em p h as i s s u p p li ed .) Id

. Un d er t h i s fo rm ul at i o n

, t h e

d i s ch arg ed co un s el can o nl y reco v er u n d er qu an t um m e r u i t fo r th o s e s erv i ces

u n d ert ak en as p art o f a m

u t u al effo rt wi t h co -co u n s el t o b en efi t t h e cl i en t wh o m t h ey

were rep res en t i ng

, an d t h u s t h e m eas u r em en t o f fees s t i ll m u s t b e p red i cat ed o n

s erv i ces t h at were ren d ered t o o r fo r t h e b en efi t o f t h e cl i en t

.

Ap p ly i n g t h i s preced en t

, we co n cl ud e t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred in award i n g 2 5

p ercen t o f t h e fees t o t h e Co ch ran Fi rm fo r i t s ori g i n at i o n o f t he cas e. Ori g i n at i o n o r

p ro cu rem en t o f a cas e

– i n ot h er wo rd s

, rai nm ak in g – i s n o t a s erv i ce b y an at t o rn ey

19t h at co n fers v al u e u p o n a cl i en t o r t hat i s ren d ered t o o r fo r t h e b en efi t o f t h e cl i en t

.

Co n s eq u en t l y

, t h e fact t h at a di s ch arg ed at t o rn ey ori g i n at ed th e cas e i s n o t a rel ev an t

fact or i n cal cu l at in g th e f e e s o w e d to t h e at t orn ey i n q u an t u m m eru i t i n a l i en

en fo rcem en t act i o n

. W e t h erefo re rev ers e t h e p o rt i o n o f t he tri al co u rt ’ s o rd er

award i n g t he Co ch ran Fi rm 2 5 p ercen t o f t h e fees fo r o ri g i n at i n g t h e cas e an d rem an d

wi t h t h e d i rect i o n t h at t h e co u rt i n s t ead d i s t ri b u t e t h os e fees t o To l s o n

.

A s p r e v i o u s l y n ot ed

, t h e Co ch ran Fi rm fi l ed a Fu l t o n Co un t y act io n ag ai n s t

To l s o n i n wh i ch i t s ou g h t m o n et ary d am ag es fo r T o l so n ’ s al l eg ed b reach o f t h e d u t y

o f l o y al t y an d u n

ju s t en ri ch m en t b y p ro cu ri n g cl i en t s, i n cl u d i n g Br y a n t

, b e fo re h er

res i gn at io n as an as s o ci at e a t t h e f i rm

. H en ce, t o th e ex t en t th e Co ch ran Fi rm i s

s eek i n g reco m

p en s e fo r T o l s o n ’ s al l eg ed u n ju s t en ri ch m en t i n p r o c u ri ng cl i en t s

wh o s e cas es were o ri g in at ed by t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

, i t m ay h av e a p ot en t i al av en u e fo r

p u rs u i n g s u ch a cl ai m t h ro u g h t h e Fu l t o n Co u n ty act i on

. W h at t h e Co ch ran Fi rm

can n ot d o

, h o w ev er, is reco v er fo r i t s o ri gi n at i o n o f t h e cas e u nd er a t h eo ry o f

q u an tu m m eru it i n a l i en en fo rcem en t act i o n

.

(b ) In co n tras t

, we d i s ag ree wi t h To l s on ’ s as s ert i o n t hat t here was in su ffi ci en t

ev i d en ce fo r t h e t ri al co urt t o award t h e Co ch ran Fi rm 5 percen t o f t h e f ees in

q u an tu m m eru i t fo r i t s pre-s u i t l e g al wo rk p erfo rm ed fo r Bry an t

. A t ri al co urt ’ s

20d e t e r m i n at i o n o f t h e reas o n ab le v al u e o f an at t o rn ey ’ s s erv i ces t o th e cl i en t wi l l b e

affi rm ed o n ap p eal i f t here is an y ev id en ce t o su p po rt i t. See Mu ll is v. S i kes

, 2 4 4 Ga.

Ap p

. 36 8

, 3 6 9 (2 ) (5 3 5 SE2 d 5 3 3 ) (2 0 0 0). “ Q u es t i o n s o f v al u e are p ecu l iarl y fo r t h e

d e t e rm i n at i o n o f t h e ju ry wh ere t h ere i s an y dat a i n ev i d en ce u p on wh i ch t h ey m ay

l eg i t i m at el y

ex erci s e t h ei r o wn k n o wl ed g e an d i d eas ,” Ba b b v. Po t t s

, 1 8 3 Ga. Ap p.

7 8 5

, 7 8 7 (1 ) (3 6 0 SE 2 d 4 4 ) (1 9 8 7 ) (ci t at i on an d p u n ct uat i on o m i t t ed ), an d “ [t ] h e

s am e ru l e o f co u rs e ap p l i es t o b en ch t ri al s b as ed o n q u an t u m m eru i t fo r at t o rn ey

fees

. ” Gr i n er

v. Fo s key

, 1 5 8 Ga. Ap p . 7 69 , 7 71 (2 ) (2 8 2 SE2 d 1 50 ) (1 9 8 1).

Here, wh i l e th e Co ch ran Fi rm d i d n ot k eep h o url y ti m e reco rd s b ecau s e i t s fee

was co n t i n g en t o n reco very

, t h ere was ev i d en ce t h at aft er b ei ng ret ai n ed b y Bry an t

t o i n v es ti g at e an d p u rs u e a m ed i cal m al pract i ce cas e rel at i ng t o h i s wi fe’ s d eat h

, t h e

Co ch r a n Fi rm p ro cu red t h e rel ev an t m ed i cal reco rd s

, res earch ed m ed i cal i s s u es

r e l a t i n g t o t h e care an d t reat m en t o f Bry an t ’ s wi fe, co n s u l t ed wi t h t h ree p o t en t i al

ex p ert s

, d ev el o p ed a t h eo ry o f t h e cas e, an d d raft ed a co m pl ai nt

. An d b ecau se To l so n

p erfo rm ed m

u ch o f t h e p re-s u i t wo rk o n b eh al f o f t h e Co ch ran Fi rm wh en s he was an

a s s o ci at e t h ere, t he tri al co u rt was en t i t l ed t o reas o n ab l y i n fer th at sh e u s e d t h e

k n o wl ed g e o b tai n ed fro m h er p re-s u i t i nv es t i g at io n wh en s h e l i t i g at ed t h e cas e wi th

t h e Fred eri ck s Fi rm t o a s u cces s fu l s et t l em en t

, an d t h u s t h at t he Co ch ran Fi rm ’ s wo rk

21h ad l as t i n g v al u e t o t h e cl i en t a n d c o n t r i b u ted t o t h e u l t i m at e res u lt t h at was

acco m pl i s h ed

. Ad d i t i o nal l y

, t h e t ri al co u rt h ad b efo re i t t h e o ri g i n al co n ti n g en cy fee

ag reem en t b et w een t h e Co ch ran Fi rm an d Bry an t

, wh ich refl ect ed t h at i f th e fi rm h ad

p ro s ecu ted t h e cas e t o i t s co m p l et i o n

, it wo u l d h av e recei v ed 4 5 p ercen t o f an y

reco v ery

. Un d er t h es e co m b i n ed ci rcu m st an ces

, t he t ri al co u rt was au th o ri zed t o fi n d

t h at t h e Co ch ran Fi rm ’ s p ro fes s i o n al s erv i ces ren d ered t o Bry an t were reas o n ab l y

v al u ed at 5 p ercen t ($ 4 0 ,0 0 0 ) o f t h e t o t al fees award

. S e e g e n eral l y B ab b

, 1 8 3 Ga.

Ap p

. at 7 8 7 (1 ); Gr in er

, 1 5 8 G a. A p p

. at 7 7 1 (2 ). W e t h erefo re affi rm t h e p ort i o n o f

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er award i n g t h e Co ch ran Fi rm 5 p ercen t o f th e fees fo r it s p re-s u i t

l eg al wo rk

.

J ud g men t a f f i r m ed i n p a r t ; r ever

s ed i n p a r t ; a n d ca s e r ema n de d w ith dire c tion.

Ra y a nd McMi l l i a n , JJ., co n cu r

.

22