Opinion ID: 2071397
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Massachusetts Bay's Claim for Attorney Fees

Text: [¶ 28] Finally, Massachusetts Bay argues that the trial court erred in declining to award it attorney fees. Title 24-A, section 2186 gives the court the discretion to award fees when it is proven that a person committed a fraudulent insurance act. 24-A M.R.S.A. § 2186(7) (2000). [15] Massachusetts Bay argues that Boutet committed fraudulent acts when he padded his damage claims, lied under oath regarding his damages and the date he seeded the course, and tampered with evidence by re-creating a construction log. [¶ 29] We afford the trial court wide discretion in determining whether or not to award attorney fees, see Mancini v. Scott, 2000 ME 19, ¶ 10, 744 A.2d 1057, 1061, and we review the trial court's factual conclusions for clear error, see White v. Zela, 1997 ME 8, ¶ 3, 687 A.2d 645, 646. The court noted that it was troubled by the actions of Boutet, but concluded that fees were inappropriate because Massachusetts Bay's errors contributed in part to the need for the trial and because the court did not find sufficiently clear evidence of wrongdoing by plaintiffs to constitute misrepresentation, concealment, or fraud. This decision was supported by the record and was, therefore, neither an abuse of its discretion nor clear error. The entry is: Judgment affirmed.