Opinion ID: 4096439
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Attorney and Expert Fees

Text: [¶16] Eric asserts that the court erred when it ordered him to pay a portion of Lindsay’s attorney fees and half of the expert costs because it failed to articulate a proper basis for the awards.2 2 We note that neither party challenged the amount or allocation of the fees incurred by the guardian ad litem. 10 [¶17] We review an award of attorney fees for an abuse of discretion. Pearson v. Wendell, 2015 ME 136, ¶ 47, 125 A.3d 1149. In deciding the amount of attorney fees to award, “the trial court has discretion to consider all factors that reasonably bear on the fairness and justness of the award.” Smith v. Padolko, 2008 ME 56, ¶ 17, 955 A.2d 740 (quotation marks omitted). “Relevant factors include the parties’ relative capacity to absorb the costs of the litigation and conduct by one party that increases the costs of the litigation.” Jandreau v. LaChance, 2015 ME 66, ¶ 29, 116 A.3d 1273. [¶18] The court’s order states that it “considered the issues, the parties’ positions, and their ability to bear the costs of litigation” in determining that it was appropriate for Eric to reimburse Lindsay for a portion of her attorney fees. Despite Eric’s contentions, this language indicates that the trial court appropriately considered relevant factors. See Smith, 2008 ME 56, ¶¶ 18-19, 955 A.2d 740. Furthermore, the court noted that it reviewed the submitted attorney fee affidavits, which provided information regarding the fees’ reasonableness, and it gave a concise, clear explanation of its reason for awarding the fees. See Miele v. Miele, 2003 ME 113, ¶ 17, 832 A.2d 760; Levy, Maine Family Law § 9.2 at 9-3 to 9-5 (8th ed. 2013). Accordingly, the court did not abuse its discretion in its award of attorney fees to Lindsay. 11 [¶19] In addition to attorney fees, a “court may order a party to pay reasonable fees and expenses of 3rd-party participants in the proceedings, including guardians ad litem, expert witnesses and providers of services, whether retained by a party or the court.” 19-A M.R.S. § 105(3) (2015). We review a trial court’s decision ordering a party to pay fees and expenses of third party participants for an abuse of discretion. See Wooldridge v. Wooldridge, 2002 ME 34, ¶¶ 3, 8, 791 A.2d 107; Cole v. A.J. Cole & Sons, Inc., 567 A.2d 1342, 1343-44 (Me. 1989). [¶20] The court found that Lindsay incurred $15,812 in fees on her credit card to have a psychologist perform a parental capacity evaluation of Eric and testify in court. The court also found that the “evaluation was made necessary by [Eric]’s behavior and conduct”; that Eric earned about $107,000 in 2015; and that Lindsay had no actual income that year but could be imputed minimum wage. Accordingly, we conclude that the court’s award of expert fees to Lindsay did not exceed its discretion. The entry is: Judgment affirmed. 12 On the briefs: Aaron Fethke, Esq., Law Office of Aaron Fethke, Searsport, for appellant Eric J. Verite Christopher K. MacLean, Esq., Elliott, MacLean, Gilbert & Coursey, LLP, Camden, for appellee Lindsay E. Verite Rockland District Court docket number FM-2010-106 FOR CLERK REFERENCE ONLY