In Fuchs & Associates, Inc. v. Lesso, Case No. B239246 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 8, 2013) (unpublished), an attorney sought to recover $647,688.13 in fees against a former client through a binding arbitration, fees in addition to what the client already had paid (about $481,000) in dissolution-related proceedings. The arbitrator awarded zilch/nada, which prompted an appeal by attorney.
Attorney did not do any better on appeal.
The appellate court found that the attorneys lien contractual language about attaching to “any recovery” was not tantamount to an attachment against all client’s assets, validating the arbitrator/lower court’s decision to narrowly construe the contractual provision.
But, there was more. Under Family Code section 2033(b), the attorney representing a client must give notice to an opponent before obtaining a lien on a client’s interest in real property to secure payment of attorney’s fees. Attorney did not do so, such that this was an alternative ground to affirm the decision by the arbitrator, as sustained by the trial judge.
As the case involves arbitration issues, on January 8, 2013, co-contributor Marc posted about Fuchs & Associates, Inc. v. Lesso on California Mediation and Arbitration.
Comments