Opinion ID: 3134964
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Calculation of Attorney Fees

Text: Johnson claims that the appellate court erred by calculating his statutory 25% share of the plaintiff’s attorney fees as 25% of the attorney’s private contractual fee of 33⅓% of the gross settlement. He contends that the calculation is controlled by our holding in In re Estate of Dierkes , 191 Ill. 2d 326, 331-32 (2000). In Dierkes , this court held that where the employer’s lien is greater than the third-party settlement, the Act limits attorney fees to 25% of the settlement amount, regardless of the amount stated in the fee agreement. Dierkes , 191 Ill. 2d at 335. We note that in Dierkes the parties agreed that the net present value of the workers’ compensation benefits due far exceeded the settlement amount. Dierkes , 191 Ill. 2d at 329. Here, no evidence was taken regarding the net present value of Johnson’s payment obligation. The trial court apparently determined Johnson’s share of attorney fees based solely on the arguments presented by the parties’ counsel and took no testimony and admitted no evidence at the hearing. Without any basis for determining the net present value of Johnson’s future benefit payments, the trial court could not properly determine the applicability of Dierkes . Thus, we reverse the judgments of the trial court and the appellate court and remand the cause to the trial court for a determination of the net present value of Johnson’s liability for workers’ compensation benefit payments. After making this determination, the trial court should consider the applicability of Dierkes and recalculate Johnson’s share of the attorney fees.