Opinion ID: 874406
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Cherry is entitled to an award of attorney fees on appeal.

Text: The district court awarded Cherry attorney fees, costs and prejudgment interest pursuant to I.C. §§ 41-1839 and § 28-22-104. [5] Coregis has not challenged that award on appeal, although in view of our determination that the order on Cherry's motion to alter and amend must be vacated, the district court ought to reconsider aspects of that order on remand. Cherry now seeks an award of attorney fees on appeal. Cherry's claim for attorney fees is based upon I.C. § 41-1839. Coregis argues that an award attorney fees ought not be awarded on appeal under § I.C. 41-1839 in cases wherein the appeal is not frivolous and was pursued in good faith. There are two provisions of I.C. § 41-1839 which may potentially apply to this appeal: subsections (1) and (4). [6] Although we have yet to award attorney fees under the latter provision, we have indicated that attorney fees may properly be awarded under I.C. § 41-1839(4) when the appeal was brought, pursued or defended frivolously, unreasonably or without foundation. Trinity Universal Ins. Co. v. Kirsling, 139 Idaho 89, 94, 73 P.3d 102, 107 (2003). As we have vacated the district courts award of $100,000, the issues presented by Coregis in this appeal are manifestly not frivolous. Thus, there is no basis for an award of attorney fees under I.C. § 41-1839(4). We have determined that Cherry is justly due $66,281.38 under the terms of the policy and that sum has not been paid. Coregis does not dispute that Cherry has provided the proof of loss required by I.C. § 41-1839(1). We can see no principled basis for engrafting the language of I.C. § 41-1839(4) to this provision. Accordingly, applying the plain language of the statute, we conclude that Cherry is entitled to an award of attorney fees incurred on appeal.