Court Opinion

ID: 9770614
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:12:43.877581+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:18.880630
License: Public Domain

*147O’CONNOR, J.,
dissenting from opinion on motions for rehearing.
I dissent from the panel’s resolution of points of error seven through 12, regarding the recovery of lost contingency fees.
Lost Contingency Fees
Bayless represented Stuart as her attorney from April 1988 to April 1991, when she withdrew. Bayless sought attorney fees for this period.
Bayless filed suit against Stuart the same month she withdrew as Stuart’s lawyer. Bayless sought attorney fees for the lawyer she hired to represent her in the lawsuit against Stuart, the period from April 1991 to September 1992, the date of trial.
Bayless also sought attorney fees in the guise of “lost contingency fees,” for the period April 1992 to September 1992. Bayless claims that if she had not been involved in her suit against Stuart, she could have accepted at least four contingency cases.
Bayless was awarded the attorney fees for Bayless’ work while representing Stuart ($214,371); attorney fees to pay Bayless’ attorney for prosecuting the suit against Stuart ($216,502); and “lost contingent fees” ($500,-000), for a total of $930,873. Stuart argues the lost contingency fees are not permitted by law. I agree.
Here is a chart of the three awards of attorney fees.
[[Image here]]
In Texas, attorney fees are available only by contract or under a statute that permits attorney fees. Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Mayfield, 923 S.W.2d 590, 593 (Tex.1996). No statute permits the recovery of attorney fees for lost contingency fees during the time a lawyer’s suit to collect fees is pending.
Even if a lawyer could claim compensation for the time such a suit was pending, the *148recovery of “lost contingent fees” is too speculative. Lost contingent fees would be contingent on the favorable resolution of too many factors: that some persons might employ Bayless as an attorney, that such cases would be successfully prosecuted, that the defendants would be solvent, and that the judgments could be collected against them.
I would hold the law does not permit the recovery of lost contingency fees to cover losses during the pendency of a lawyer’s suit against a client; and, lost contingency fees are too speculative to be recoverable. Thus, I would sustain points of error seven through 12.
WILSON, J., joins this opinion.