Branch Banking and Trust Co. v. Lavi ( 2016 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST No. 67123
COMPANY, SUCCESSOR-IN-
INTEREST TO COLONIAL BANK BY
ACQUISITION OF ASSETS FROM THE
FDIC AS RECEIVER FOR COLONIAL
BANK, A NORTH CAROLINA
FILED
BANKING CORPORATION MAY 1 1 2016
ORGANIZED AND IN GOOD
STANDING UNDER THE LAWS OF
NORTH CAROLINA,
Appellant,
vs.
SIMON LAVI, AN INDIVIDUAL,
Respondent.
ORDER OF REVERSAL AND REMAND
This is an appeal from a district court order awarding attorney
fees and costs in an action to recover on a guaranty. Eighth Judicial
District Court, Clark County; Valerie Adair, Judge.
Respondent initially joined with his codefendants in
employing two law firms to defend the action. Over a year later, he hired
separate attorneys to represent his interests because of a conflict of
interest with his codefendants. Thereafter, he successfully sought writ
relief from this court, which resulted in a favorable judgment in the
underlying action, and the district court then granted his request for
attorney fees and costs.
Appellant contends that the district court did not adequately
address the Brunzell v. Golden Gate National Bank, 85 Nev. 345, 349, 455
P.2d 31, 33 (1969), factors in awarding respondent $300,400 in attorney
fees and $16,828.74 in costs. It specifically contends that the work
performed by respondent's first two law firms were not reasonable because
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
respondent had asserted to the court that he had fired those attorneys on
(0) 1947A
Rig7.3
the ground that they did not "adequately or appropriately defend{] his
interests and . . . failed to raise legitimate claims and defenses."
The district court awarded respondent his attorney fees based
on the guaranty's clause allowing the prevailing party reasonable attorney
fees, which requires the district court to determine the reasonableness of
the requested attorney fees. The district court also awarded respondent
his costs under NRS 18.020, and such costs must also be reasonable. See
NRS 18.005. While the district court stated that it considered the
reasonableness of the requested attorney fees under the Brunzell factors
and reduced the award of attorney fees by $25,092, it is unclear from the
record before us why the court determined that amount was unreasonable
or even which attorneys had incurred that amount. Without any analysis
regarding which fees or costs are reasonable or what the $25,092 reduction
applied to, we cannot adequately review the award of attorney fees and
costs. See Logan v. Abe, 131 Nev., Adv. Op. 31, 350 P.3d 1139, 1143-44
(2015) (explaining that this court reviews an award of attorney fees and an
award of costs for an abuse of discretion). Therefore, we reverse the award
of attorney fees and costs and remand this matter to the district court to
determine the reasonableness of the fees and costs incurred by each
attorney that represented respondent.
It is so ORDERED.
/ fre..in
Hardesty
J.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) I907A
cc: Hon. Valerie Adair, District Judge
Stephen E. Haberfeld, Settlement Judge
Sylvester & Polednak, Ltd.
Schwartz Flansburg PLLC
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e