Price v. Allstate Insurance ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                   July 7, 2006
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 05-20394
    Summary Calendar
    JOE PRICE, ARETHA PRICE
    Plaintiffs - Counter Defendants - Appellants
    - Cross - Appellees
    v.
    ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO
    Defendant - Counter Claimant - Appellee -
    Cross - Appellant
    JEFFREY A SHADWICK
    Defendant - Appellee
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:03-CV-804
    --------------------
    Before KING, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Joe and Aretha Price appeal from the district court’s order
    granting Defendant Allstate Texas Lloyd Company’s motion to
    enforce settlement agreement.   The record shows that the Prices
    brought suit against Allstate in state court when Allstate
    refused to provide coverage for claimed damages under the Prices’
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
    under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 05-20394
    -2-
    homeowner’s insurance policy.   Allstate removed the case to
    federal court under the district court’s diversity jurisdiction.
    The Prices’ attorney subsequently agreed with Allstate’s counsel
    to settle the case and Allstate tendered payment, but the Prices
    refused to execute the settlement papers, contending that they
    had not agreed to a full and final settlement of all claims.    The
    Prices believed that the settlement amount was to cover only
    damage to their home and excluded their claims for personal
    property damage and additional living expenses.   Allstate then
    counterclaimed for breach of the settlement agreement, seeking
    specific performance and an award of attorneys’ fees.   The
    district court granted the enforcement of the agreement but
    denied Allstate’s request for fees.
    The Prices argue that their counsel lacked authority to
    settle their entire case and breached his fiduciary duty to them.
    The record contains evidence of written communications between
    the Prices, their attorney, and Allstate’s attorney discussing a
    settlement contingent upon a full and final settlement of all
    claims.   The Prices’ counsel communicated Allstate’s final
    settlement offer to Joe Price, who responded unconditionally that
    counsel should accept the offer.   Based on the record, including
    testimony of the parties at an evidentiary hearing, the district
    court did not reversibly err by holding that plaintiffs’ counsel
    had authority to settle the entire case.   See Cavallini v. State
    Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 
    44 F.3d 256
    , 266 (5th Cir. 1995); Walden
    No. 05-20394
    -3-
    v. Sanger, 
    250 S.W.2d 312
    , 316 (Tex. App. 1952); TEX. R. CIV. P.
    11; see also Terrain Enter., Inc. v. Western Cas. and Sur. Co.,
    
    774 F.2d 1320
    , 1322 (5th Cir. 1985).
    Allstate cross-appeals from the district court’s denial of
    its request for attorney’s fees.        The Prices’s briefs contain no
    response to Allstate’s cross-appeal on this issue.       Under Texas
    state law, a court has discretion to determine the amount of a
    fee award but the award of reasonable fees is mandatory if a
    party prevails on a breach of contract claim.        See DP Solutions,
    Inc. v. Rollins, Inc., 
    353 F.3d 421
    , 436 (5th Cir. 2003); TEX.
    CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 38.001.    Allstate prevailed on its
    claim for specific performance under the settlement agreement,
    and the district court abused its discretion by denying the fee
    request.   See Kona Tech., Corp. v. Southern Pac. Transp. Co., 
    225 F.3d 595
    , 614 (5th Cir. 2000); Rasmusson v. LBC Petrounited,
    Inc., 
    124 S.W.3d 283
    , 287 (Tex. App. 2002).       Ordinarily, we would
    remand to the district court so that it could determine the
    amount of the fees to be awarded to Allstate.       In this case, that
    would simply increase the amount of the legal work that
    Allstate’s counsel would be required to do and thereby increase
    the fees that the Prices would be required to pay.       We elect,
    instead, to fix the amount of the fees and expenses to be awarded
    to Allstate for all phases of this case, both in the district
    court and on appeal, at $8,000.
    No. 05-20394
    -4-
    AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED IN PART AND JUDGMENT RENDERED
    AGAINST THE PRICES FOR ALLSTATE’S ATTORNEYS FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF
    $8,000.   The Prices shall bear the costs of this appeal.   The
    mandate shall issue forthwith.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-20394

Judges: King, Wiener, Demoss

Filed Date: 7/7/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024