Weinberg v. Farmers State Bank of Worden

In Weinberg v. Farmers State Bank of Worden, 231 Mont. 10, 35, 752 P.2d 719, 735 (1988) the Court recognized that, in fixing attorney's fees, while the district court is not bound by contingent fee agreements, the court still evaluated the different factors in light of the presumption that the amount due the claimant's attorney under the contingent fee contract is reasonable. Weinberg, 231 Mont. at 34. In this regard, the court stated: Statutory or contractual provisions for attorney fees to the successful party are not based upon contingency of collection, but rather upon the expectation that the losing party will in fact pay the attorney fees awarded. In a contingent fee arrangement, there is a factor of risk undertaken by the attorney that he may receive nothing for his labor. It is that factor of risk which prompts courts to approve contingent fees which might otherwise seem unnecessarily large. The risk of no return is a component or factor tending to support a larger fee. Such risk is not contemplated in those cases involving statutory or contractual provisions for attorney fees. Weinberg, 231Mont. at 35-36. In Weinberg, the attorneys were claiming fees of $ 91,531.53, and the district court approved attorneys' fees in the amount of $ 12,500.00, which was affirmed by the Montana Supreme Court.