GARRETT v. BELL

Citations

• 2024 OK CIV APP 13

Syllabus

¶1 Plaintiffs David M. Garrett and the Garrett Law Office (collectively \Garrett\) appeal an order granting summary judgment on their claims against attorney Richard A. Bell and the Bell Law Firm, LPPC (collectively \Bell\), in this attorney's fee dispute. Garrett sought declaratory judgment as to the enforceability of a fee-splitting or referral agreement against Bell, and asserted various related contract and tort claims. 1 Bell asserted that an agreement to share fees on any particular case was unenforceable under Oklahoma Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5(e), and that Garrett's claims to fees should have been brought during proceedings for fees before the Workers' Compensation Court of Existing Claims (CEC) and were barred by the doctrine of res judicata or claim preclusion. The district court granted summary judgment to Bell. On review of the applicable law and the record, we affirm the trial court's judgment of December 21, 2022, in part, with respect to eighteen cases Bell did not litigate in the CEC, and reverse the remainder of the district court's judgment, and remand for further proceedings.