Opinion ID: 1925734
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Court's Action in Reducing Attorney Fees

Text: [¶ 5.] Atchison's client was charged with one count of child rape and three counts of sexual contact with a child. [3] Defendant faced a potential sentence on the criminal charges of life plus forty-five years. [¶ 6.] Atchison submitted bills to the court as the case against her client developed. Her total bill was $25,250.15 which included (1) $13,299.50 for attorney fees, (2) $ 8,614.50 for Expert Fees, (3) $950.00 for Investigator Fees and (4) $2,386.15 for Costs/Disbursements. Judge Tice reduced the attorney fees by approximately $4,100. The experts and investigator's fees were paid in full. Atchison wrote Judge Tice a letter requesting an explanation as to why [Judge Tice] believed such a reduction was necessary. Judge Tice indicated that the main reasons for reducing Atchison's fees were because (1) her efforts went beyond that which would be reasonable or appropriate under the circumstances (2) that she had pursued areas of law which were not particularly productive under the circumstances, in particular you chose to initiate an inquiry into the proportionality of sentencing before sentencing occurred and (3) the `Daubert' proceedings considerably exceeded that which is necessary to present what is appropriate under the circumstances of this case. Judge Tice was also concerned about the expert fees generated by the lengthy hearing. [4] [¶ 7.] Although Judge Tice's letters explain his reasons for reducing the bill, the explanation did not take into consideration all of the reasonableness factors that a court is required to consider and that we have recently set forth in Duffy. Id. ¶ 16. For example, Judge Tice did not address that the defendant faced a possible punishment of a life sentence. Judge Tice's main concern was the length and nature of a hearing on the admissibility of the child's hearsay statements and the research on proportionality in preparation for the sentencing hearing. Yet, the reduction of fees does not appear to be in proportion to the time spent on these matters. [¶ 8.] In justification for her fee to the reviewing panel of judges, Atchison submitted documents, her affidavit and affidavits from attorneys attesting to the reasonableness of her strategies and fees. She also presented oral argument during the fifteen minutes she was allowed. Atchison explained to the panel that the lengthy hearing of which Judge Tice complained moved the State to offer her client a plea bargain allowing her client to plead to two counts of child neglect with dismissal of the other charges. [5] [¶ 9.] The panel affirmed the fee reductions (Judge Delaney dissenting) in an Order which simply stated: A majority of the Circuit Court Judges having considered an appeal filed by attorney, Rena Atchison, from the Trial Court's Judgment reducing her request for attorney's fees from $ 13,299.50 to $ 9,149.35 and the Court having considered an oral presentation from Ms. Atchison as well as Affidavits and documentary evidence, does hereby Affirm the trial Court Order reducing her fees in the above-entitled matter. The panel also wrote Atchison a post-hearing letter which merely restated the reasons for the reductions from Judge Tice's earlier letters to Atchison.