Court Opinion

ID: 9565130
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:15:26.917458+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:25.654866
License: Public Domain

Littlejohn, Justice
(concurring and dissenting) :
I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Lewis except on one point. The husband submits that the lower court abused its discretion in directing him to pay counsel fees in the amount of $175,000.00 to the attorneys for the wife. In my view the fee is excessive such as to require the intervention of this Court and a reversal on this one issue.
The attorneys estimated the amount of time spent in the handling of this case. Based on these estimates the lower court found that they had spent in excess of 750 hours collectively. Accepting 750 hours as being correct, the fee amounts to $233.33 per hour per lawyer. If the number of hours spent on this case is more, the amount per hour would, of course, be correspondingly reduced.
The wife had much involved. She was justified in employing able counsel, which she did; counsel were justified in diligently pursuing the case, which they did. The writer of this dissent was the author of the opinion affirming the lower court in the case for the handling of which the husband must now pay attorneys’ fees. The management of the case created difficulties and was troublesome only in the sense that the wife could have lost much. At the same time, the issues were not greatly complicated and the wife was clearly entitled to win, as held by the lower court and promptly affirmed by the unanimous vote of the members of this Court.
The attorneys are entitled to be paid by the husband, but the services rendered simply do not justify payment of $175,000.00.
*197I would reverse the lower court on this issue and either remand the case for reassessment of the fee or have this Court set the amount.
Brailsford, J., concurs.