Hill v. Davis

850 N.E.2d 993, 2006 Ind. App. LEXIS 1388, 2006 WL 2022006
CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedJuly 20, 2006
Docket32A01-0603-CV-85
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 850 N.E.2d 993 (Hill v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hill v. Davis, 850 N.E.2d 993, 2006 Ind. App. LEXIS 1388, 2006 WL 2022006 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

OPINION

BAILEY, Judge.

Case Summary

Appellants-Plaintiffs Jonathan and Kelly Hill (collectively, "Tenants") appeal the trial court's award of attorney's fees, in the amount of $6,300.00, as being inadequate. We affirm.

Issue

Tenants raise one issue, which we restate as whether the small claims court abused its discretion by reducing the amount of attorney's fees sought from $13,857.00 to $6,800.00.

Facts and Procedural History

In a prior appeal, another panel of this Court summarized the relevant facts as follows:

On August 21, 2008, Tenants entered into a lease agreement with [Lanie Davis ("Landlord")] to lease the residential property at 7954 West Main Street in Coatesville, Indiana. The lease was for a period of one year, and Tenants paid Landlord a security deposit of $500.
On May 10, 2004, Tenants sent Landlord a letter notifying her that they were dissatisfied with the rental property and that they would be vacating the premises by June 9, 2004. On May 19, 2004, Landlord filed a notice of claim for damages against Tenants in the small claims court. In her notice of claim, Landlord alleged that "[Tenants were] in breach of a Lease due to unpaid rent and utility bills" and demanded judgment against Tenants for $3,000.00 plus interest, attorney's fees, and costs. Landlord sent the notice of claim to Tenants at the rental property address in Coatesville.
On June 9, 2004, Tenants moved out of the rental property, but they did not leave a forwarding address because they were homeless. On June 15, 2004, the notice of claim was returned to the small claims court as undelivered. On June 17, 2004, Landlord filed an alias notice of claim and alleged the same damages as in her original notice of claim. Landlord sent the alias notice of claim to Tenants at Kelly's place of employment, and Tenants received service.
On August 17, 2004, Landlord appeared with counsel and Tenants appeared pro se for a bench trial in the small claims court. Tenants moved to continue the trial so that they could hire counsel, and the small claims court granted the continuance. During the hearing, the small claims court asked Tenants where they were living and receiving mail. Jonathan responded that their address was 1882 Knox Drive, Clayton, Indiana, 46118. The small claims court changed its chronological case summary ("CCS") to reflect the Clayton address for Jonathan. Thereafter, the small claims court mailed a copy of its CCS entry, which showed that the bench trial had been rescheduled for September 14, 2004 and which contained Tenants' home address in Clayton, to Landlord's attorney and to Tenants.
Tenants obtained counsel and moved to continue the trial. The small claims court ultimately reset the trial for October 26, 2004. On October 17, 2004, Tenants filed a counterclaim and alleged that they were entitled to return of their $500 security deposit because Landlord had failed to send them an itemized list of damages within forty-five days of them providing their forwarding address.

*995 Hill v. Davis, 832 N.E.2d 544, 545-46 (Ind.Ct.App.2005) (footnote omitted). After conducting a bench trial, the small claims court entered judgment in favor of Landlord, in the amount of $3,000.00 for rent, late charges, and unpaid utility charges. Id. at 548. The small claims court also awarded attorney's fees to Landlord in the amount of $350.00, as well as court costs in the amount of $44.00. Id.

Tenants timely appealed the small claims court's judgment, arguing that it was clearly erroneous in light of Indiana Code 32-81-38, ie., the Security Deposit Statute. 1 The Hill Court agreed, reversed the judgment of the small claims court, and remanded with instructions to enter judgment in favor Tenants and to determine the proper amount of attorney's fees and costs. Hill, 832 N.E.2d at 555.

On remand, Tenants sought attorney's fees in the aggregate amount of $13,857.00, plus costs in the amount of $969.03. Tenants attached to their motion for attorney's fees an affidavit from attorney Clifford Shepard ("Shepard"), who began representing them on August 24, 2004, that detailed his legal experience, in general, and his knowledge of consumer law issues, in particular. In his affidavit, Shepard explained that he has personally expended "39.90 hours" representing Tenants in this action, for a resulting fee of $10,578.50, and, further, that two of his paralegals have expended 81.5 hours, resulting in a fee of $3,283.50. 2 After conducting a hearing on the reasonableness of Tenants' attorney's fees, the small claims court awarded Tenants the return of their $500.00 security deposit, $6,300.00 in attorney's fees, as well as $969.03 in costs. Tenants now appeal the trial court's award of attorney's fees as inadequate.

Discussion and Decision

On appeal, Tenants argue that the trial court abused its discretion by awarding them attorney's fees in the amount of $6,300.00, instead of the *996 $13,857.00 requested. 3 Indiana follows the "American Rule" that each party involved in litigation must pay its own attorney's fees. Salcedo v. Toepp, 696 N.E.2d 426, 435 (Ind.Ct.App.1998). Generally, attorney's fees are not recoverable from the opposing party as costs, damages, or otherwise, "in the absence of an agreement between the parties, statutory authority, or rule to the contrary." Swartz v. Swartz, 720 N.E.2d 1219, 1223 (Ind.Ct.App.1999) (citations omitted).

Here, as the Hill Court aptly noted, Indiana Code Section 32-31-3-12(b) permits a tenant to recover reasonable attorney's fees if his or her landlord failed to comply with the statutory requirement of providing an itemized list of damages within forty-five days of the termination of the rental agreement and delivery of the property. See Ind.Code § 32-31-3-12; see also Hill, 832 N.E.2d at 554. Further, the Hill Court determined that, under the facts and cireumstances of this case, Landlord failed to comply with the notice requirements of the security deposit statute. See Hill, 832 N.E.2d at 555. Accordingly, pursuant to Indiana Code Section 32-31-3-12 and the doctrine of res judicata, Tenants are entitled to recover their reasonable attorney's fees in defending against Landlord's claim and in pursuing their counterclaim.

That said, a trial court's decision as to the amount of an attorney's fee award is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. Kellogg v. City of Gary, 562 N.E.2d 685, 715 (Ind.1990); see also Evans v. Tuttle by Tuttle, 645 N.E.2d 1119, 1121 (Ind.Ct.App.1995).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
850 N.E.2d 993, 2006 Ind. App. LEXIS 1388, 2006 WL 2022006, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-davis-indctapp-2006.