Legal ‘Wins’ That Can Feel Like Losses
The recent decision, Vision Landscapes v. Amundson, concerns a landscaping company (“Vision”), and a married couple, the Amundsons. The Amundsons hired Vision for landscaping services but disputed Vision’s final invoice. The dispute arose when the Amundsons refused to pay Vision, which then filed a lien and filed a lawsuit. Following extensive motion practice, the Amundsons made an offer of judgment for $30,000 to Vision. Vision accepted the offer of judgment, and as a result was considered the “prevailing party.” Vision then moved to recover its attorneys’ fees, approximately $114,000. The trial court did award Vision its attorneys’ fees but reduced the same to $59,000. The trial court’s reduction was premised on the fact that Vision had sought fees incurred in pursuit of unsuccessful claims.
Vision then appealed the trial court’s reduction of its fee request as arbitrary. The Court of Appeals ultimately remanded back to the trial court to address the reduction of Vision’s fee award and provide additional explanation and analysis. The Court of Appeals limited the issue on remand to solely the calculus for reduction of Vision’s fee award only upon claims which Vision prevailed and affirmed the remainder of the trial court’s decision. Additionally, both Vision and the Amundsons sought an award of their attorney fees on appeal, but the Court of Appeals found that neither party was the clear “winner” on appeal and did not award either party their appellate fees and costs.
While it is impossible to know for certain, it seems reasonable that Vision believed that by virtue of accepting the Amundsons’ Offer of Judgment and therefore being the “prevailing party” that it would be able to recoup most, if not all, of its attorney’s fees.
This outcome demonstrates the importance of hiring an attorney with sound independent judgment as described here in David Tingstad’s article “Independent Judgment.” It can mean the difference between pursuing valid claims to an efficient resolution, while at the same time identifying and avoiding situations in which the cost of litigation dwarves the best possible recovery.
In Independent Judgment, Tingstad explains that the best lawyers don’t just follow a client’s lead; they provide detached analysis, weigh risks, and recommend strategies that align with long term goals. With the ability to rely on the benefit hindsight in the Vision Landscaping decision detailed above, it is easy to imagine the potential benefits that the Independent Judgment approach might have had. Simply, any person considering litigation should be advised of the potential that the cost of a lawsuit could far outweigh the ultimate recovery. The takeaway is clear: true success isn’t just about “winning” in court, it’s about making informed, strategic decisions.
For anyone navigating construction or property disputes whether you’re a homeowner, contractor, or architect, always remember that there can be unforeseen costs of “winning,” that may ultimately feel like a loss. The key is to seek advice of counsel so that you are comfortable and confident in making informed and strategic decisions. The attorneys at Beresford Booth are here to provide you with their legal expertise to help you assess your claims, or claims made against you, evaluate risks, and offer personally tailored solutions to meet your personal needs. If you are facing a similar dispute, lien issue, or contract conflict, please contact Beresford Booth at info@beresfordlaw.com or by phone at (425) 776-4100 to discuss how we can help you avoid costly missteps and achieve the best possible outcome.
