Opinion ID: 3052575
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The March 21, 2001 Retainer Agreement

Text: In March 2001, Jeffrey and Amy Bertelsen signed a retainer agreement (“the March 2001 agreement”) with Harris and his firm, Harris Berne Christensen LLP. The agreement 1 Although Harris was licensed in Oregon, the parties do not dispute the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct apply to him and Appellants’ action is governed by Washington law. 10256 BERTELSEN v. HARRIS stated the Bertelsens, for and on behalf of BFG, retained Harris and his firm “as attorneys for the purpose of representing and handling any and all legal matters on behalf of [BFG] which may, from time to time, be requested. You have specifically requested that we work to negotiate a resolution of the ARCO franchise terminations and related issues.” The agreement also stated BFG would pay the firm on an hourly basis, at its rates of $150-$195/hour for attorneys. The agreement also required BFG to pay a $10,000 retainer, which the Bertelsens paid on or about April 23, 2001. Jeffrey and Amy Bertelsen received detailed bills describing services rendered between March 2001 and May 2001, with a breakdown of time spent and hourly rates, from Harris’s firm. They paid these bills without objection (nor do they claim any breach of fiduciary duty with respect to those bills). During Spring 2001, it became clear ARCO had no interest in continuing a business relationship with BFG and did not intend to rescind the notice of termination. Indeed, ARCO filed an action against BFG in August 2001 for money due under loan agreements with BFG. The Bertelsens decided they would try to sell the six gas stations as a business solution, to avoid bankruptcy. In May 2001, Jeffrey and Amy Bertelsen asked Harris and McPherson (the non-attorney industry consultant) to seek a buyer for the stations.