Reynolds v. Polen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that where an attorney bears substantial responsibility for his or her discharge the court “should deduct the costs of work that had to be duplicated or modified from the discharged counsel’s quantum meruit recovery”
• noting that where an attorney bears substantial responsibility for his or her discharge the court \should deduct the costs of work that had to be duplicated or modified from the discharged counsel's quantum meruit recovery\
• remanding to the trial court to “determine the percentage of the one-third fee that represents” the discharged attorney’s “overall contribution to the settlement.”
• listing quantum meruit factors, including “the amount in question and the results achieved”
• reversing the trial court order denying a portion of the contingency fee agreement to the discharged law firm and remanding for the trial court to “determine the percentage of the one-third fee that represents [the discharged law firm’s] overall contribution to the settlement.”
• “[Q]uantum meruit recovery of attorney[’s] fees is barred when an attorney engages in misconduct that results in representation that falls below the standard required of an attorney.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).