Hagan Law Group, PLLC
Tennessee generally follows the American Rule regarding the payment of attorneys’ fees, which permits the recovery of fees in very limited situations. Many clients are disappointed when they win their case but still have to pay their attorney’s fee.
Contractual provisions, which provide for attorneys’ fees, have become a regular practice in contract drafting to hedge against the outcome of American Rule for the prevailing party. These provisions are a very important consideration for construction industry clients and were the discussion of a recent Tennessee Court of Appeals case.
In Barrett v. Ocoee Land Holdings, LLC the Court strictly construed the terms of the parties’ construction contracts regarding a claim for an award of attorneys’ fees. In that case, the homeowners sued the homebuilder, real estate developer, and other individuals involved in those entities related to the purchase of, and planned construction of a house on a lot in a subdivision. The homeowners sued under various theories including breach of contract, civil conspiracy to commit wrongdoing, the Consumer Protection Act, and the Fraudulent Conveyance Act. The case was tried before a jury, and the homeowners lost their claims. There was a provision in the contract between the homeowners and defendants, which provided an award for attorneys’ fees for the prevailing party. The jury never heard any proof about the attorneys’ fees, and there was no space on the jury verdict form for an award of fees. The trial court reserved the issue of fees and ultimately denied defendants’ claim for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses.
The defendants appealed the decision of the trial court, and the Court of Appeals reversed. The Court of Appeals held that, “Tennessee allows an exception to the American Rule where the contract specifically or expressly provides for the recovery of attorneys fees.” The Court went on to explain that the litigation between the parties fit the exact situation contemplated by the fee provision, as the parties contract stated that they “agree to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses to the prevailing party in litigation ‘arising out of [the] Contract.” Based on the terms of the contract, the defendants were ‘each entitled to the enforcement of their contractual right to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses’ under the ‘plain terms of the attorney’s fee provision.’”
So, at least in Tennessee, those prevailing party fee provisions in construction law contracts are very important to the outcomes in litigation as an exception to the American Rule.
The author, I'Ashea Myles-Dihigo, is a contributor to The Dispute Resolver and Of Counsel Attorney with Hagan Law Group, PLLC based in Murfreesboro, TN. She may be contacted at 615.546.4066 or firstname.lastname@example.org.