Court Opinion

ID: 9569848
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:18:02.054757+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:04:09.746232
License: Public Domain

JOHNSON, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
I concur in the Court’s opinion, except part II-B (The Amount of Fees Awarded), from which I dissent.
*623In Brinkman v. Aid Ins. Co., 115 Idaho 346, 766 P.2d 1227 (1988), the Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the insured an attorney fee that was roughly equal to the fee charged in a contingent fee contract between the insured and his attorneys. 115 Idaho at 350-51, 766 P.2d at 1231-32. Here, the Court turns Brinkman on its head and, in effect, holds that the trial court abused its discretion by not awarding the insured an attorney fee equal to a contingent fee.
In my view, the trial court considered the factors enumerated in I.R.C.P. 54(e)(3) and did not abuse its discretion in awarding an attorney fee that was less than a one-third contingent fee.
BAKES, C.J., concurs.