law-attorneys-fees-for-ad-litem-attorney | attorneys-fees-divorce | law-attorneys-fees-amount | attorney fee
factors | reasonableness of attorney's fees | atty fees in contract cases | UDJA declaratory judgment claim and
attorney's fees | fees in family law cases | fees for ad litem attorney | attorney's fees in eviction case | appellate
attorney's fees | fee appeals |
AD LITEM ATTORNEY'S FEES
The amount of compensation awarded to an ad litem lies within the sound discretion of the trial court, and a
reviewing court will not overturn a fee award absent evidence showing a clear abuse of discretion. See Simon
v. York Crane & Rigging Co., 739 S.W.2d 793, 794 (Tex. 1987); In re Guardianship of Glasser, 297 S.W.3d
369, 377 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2009, no pet.). A trial court abuses its discretion when it acts arbitrarily,
unreasonably, or without reference to any guiding rules and principles of law. Downer v. Aquamarine
Operators, Inc., 701 S.W.2d 238, 241–42 (Tex. 1985). In making a fee award, a trial court may consider: (1)
the time and labor involved; (2) the nature and complexity of the case; (3) the amount of money or value of the
property or interest involved; (4) the extent of the responsibilities assumed by the attorney; (5) whether the
attorney lost other employment because of the undertaking; (6) the benefits resulting to the client from the
services; (7) the contingency or certainty of compensation; and (8) whether employment is casual or for an
established or constant client. Alford v. Whaley, 794 S.W.2d 920, 925 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1990,
no writ).
Johnson does not argue that the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees was not just or was excessive. Rather,
Johnson contends that the award was improper in the absence of a sworn affidavit of the reasonableness of
the ad litem’s fees. However, Johnson cites to no authority supporting the proposition that an affidavit is a
condition precedent to an award of ad litem fees. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(i); compare Alford, 794 S.W.2d at
925 (“There is no requirement that there be evidence in the record to support a court’s award of attorney’s
fees to a[n] . . . ad litem.”). While there are no time records reflecting the precise amount of time spent
handling the case, the record reflects some evidence of the actual legal services rendered by the ad litem and
evidence that the fee awarded was reasonable.
The ad litem was appointed to represent a number of unknown heirs and filed pleadings on their behalf.
Lawrence attended and participated in hearings relating to the partitioning of the property. Moreover, the
underlying proceeding continued for two and a half years, and the ad litem successfully protected his clients’
ownership interests in Tracts 1 and 2. At the conclusion of the proceeding, the trial court determined in its final
partition judgment that “in light of the difficulty and complexity of making the partition,” $3,000.00 was a
reasonable fee for Lawrence’s ad litem services. See Alford, 794 S.W.2d at 925 (reasoning that in determining
the reasonableness of ad litem fees, the appellate court may look at the record and draw on the common
knowledge of the court justices and their experience as lawyers and judges to view the matter in light of the
testimony, the record, the complexity of the case, and the amount in controversy). We find that the trial court
did not act arbitrarily, unreasonably, or without reference to any guiding rules and principles of law in awarding
the ad litem $3,000.00 for services rendered in the underlying suit. Accordingly, we overrule Johnson’s eighth
issue.
Johnson v. Evans (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 9, 2010)(Hedges)
(suit for partition of land, two-stage proceedings with two final judgments, effect of nonsuit)
(amount of ad litem fee affirmed, ad litem attorney for defendants served by publication)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Chief Justice Adele Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Seymore and Sullivan
14-08-00610-CV Gerald K. Johnson v. Christine Evans and Frederick M. Evans
Appeal from 3rd District Court of Anderson County
Trial Court Judge: Bascom W. Bentley
TEXAS CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | HOUSTON COURTS OF APPEALS |
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE