Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Civil Litigation Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Two homebuyers filed a breach of contract case against Concord Homes Limited, Concord Custom Homes, Tolmas Enterprises and Alan Tolmas when they were unsatisfied with the renovation the Concord Homes Limited did on a home they purchased. At trial, a jury ruled in favor of all defendants, awarding them $4,000 (the earnest money paid by the buyers) and $110,000 in attorneys’ fees. The buyers appeal they attorneys’ fees, because: 1. the fees were not segregated among the four defendants, 2. there was no evidence to support the submission of a jury question on attorneys’ fees, and 3. the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the jury finding. HOLDING:Affirmed. The court rejects the first point of error because the buyers did not specifically ask the trial court to segregate the fees, nor did they specifically object to the trial court’s failure to do so. Additionally, Concord Homes Limited was the “main defendant.” There was enough evidence about attorneys’ fees at trial to justify sending the question to the jury. The award itself was supported by the evidence, to The four attorneys involved testified to specific amounts expended by their firms in pretrial defense of the action for a total of $92,626.36 Two of the attorneys gave their hourly rates of $190 per hour and $275 per hour, and noted that there were 30 additional hours for the month in which the trial took place, but not including the daily activities. The jury was also invited to include the time it had spent with the attorneys during the four-day trial. The jury had a dollar amount to work with, as well as an hourly rate to attribute to at least two of the attorneys, to reach an amount at least close to $110,000. “The evidence of exact dollar amounts does not add up to the precise dollar amount of the jury answer. But, in light of the evidence detailed above, which was before the jury, we cannot say that the jury answer to the question on attorneys’ fees was made against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence, or that the evidence cannot fairly be said to support its answer.” OPINION:Morris, C.J.; Morris, C.J., Ross and Carter, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.