Skip to main content

Lesa C. Williams v. Renard A. Hirsch, Sr.

Tenn. Ct. App.May 25, 2018No. M2016-00503-COA-R3-CV

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
bench trial

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Excerpt

This is the third appeal in this declaratory judgment action. The action seeks a determination of whether a discharged attorney is entitled to compensation for his services in connection with a tort action that settled after his discharge. After a bench trial, the trial court determined that the discharged attorney's right to compensation was governed by a retainer agreement with the client, as modified by a subsequent letter agreement. The retainer agreement entitled the attorney, upon discharge, to compensation calculated at a reasonable hourly rate or one third of any offer made to settle the case, whichever was greater, plus expenses. Because no bona fide settlement offer was made before the attorney was discharged and the attorney provided insufficient evidence of the time he spent on the case, the trial court declared that the discharged attorney was not entitled to compensation. The trial court also awarded sanctions against the attorney for discovery abuse. Upon review, we discern no reversible error. So we affirm.

What This Ruling Means

**The Dispute** This case involved a lawyer who was fired by his client but wanted to be paid for work he had done on a legal case. The lawyer had been working on a lawsuit for his client when he was discharged. After he was let go, the case eventually settled, and the lawyer claimed he deserved compensation for the work he had contributed to that settlement. **The Court's Decision** The court had to decide whether the fired lawyer was entitled to payment based on the original contract he signed with his client. After a trial, the judge ruled that the lawyer's right to compensation should be determined by looking at his original retainer agreement (the contract that spelled out payment terms) along with a letter that modified those terms. The case went through multiple appeals, showing it was a complex dispute. **What This Means for Workers** This case highlights an important principle for all workers: when you're let go from a job, you may still have rights to compensation for work you've already completed. Employment contracts and agreements can protect workers even after termination. However, the specific terms of your contract will determine what you're entitled to receive, so it's important to understand your employment agreement from the start.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.