Morphew Law Office attorney, Jon W. Morphew, is going to be submitting an amicus curiae brief to the Minnesota Court of Appeals in the case State of Minnesota v. David J. Schaffer, et al. In that case, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (“MnDOT”) is seeking a decision from the Court of Appeals, which would cap the attorney’s fees that must be paid to a property owner from whom MnDOT took property.

In the Schaffer case, MnDOT took property from a property owner, Joseph Hamlin. In his claim of damages for the taking of his property, Mr. Hamlin received a final award of damages that was 114% greater than the amount he had been offered by MnDOT. As a result of this, Mr. Hamlin was entitled to be reimbursed for the attorney’s fees he incurred in his case under Minnesota Statute 117.031(a).

Mr. Hamlin submitted a claim for his attorney’s fees based upon the hours his attorneys worked on his case because the amount of time his attorneys worked on his case was far greater than the fees they earned based upon their contingency fee agreement. This is called the lodestar analysis and is the standard process by which attorney’s fees are awarded in eminent domain cases in Minnesota. However, MnDOT argued that Mr. Hamlin’s fee reimbursement was capped at the amount he actually paid under the terms of his contingency fee agreement. This was the exact opposite argument that MnDOT had previously made in a prior case on the issue of the appropriate method for determining the amount of attorney’s fees that must be reimbursed to a person in an eminent domain case. In that prior case, MnDOT argued that the lodestar analysis must be used to determine the amount of the attorney’s fees that must be paid. The district court concluded that Mr. Hamlin must be reimbursed for his attorney’s fees based upon the lodestar analysis even though that resulted in payment of his attorney’s fees in excess of the amount he paid under the terms of his contingency fee agreement.

In its appeal to the Court of Appeals, MnDOT is arguing that Mr. Hamlin’s reimbursement for his attorney’s fees must be capped at the amount he actually paid under the terms of his contingency fee agreement. It is Mr. Morphew’s belief that if the Court of Appeals were to accept MnDOT’s argument, it would have a significant chilling effect upon a property owner’s ability to retain competent legal counsel throughout the state. The reason for this is that if an award of attorney’s fees is capped at the contingency rate actually paid by the property owner, it will provide a significant financial incentive for acquiring authorities to refuse to negotiate in good faith and to engage in lengthy and time consuming litigation in order to deter attorneys from representing property owners in cases where the damages are relatively small.

Mr. Morphew will provide arguments to the Court of Appeals based upon his Laechelt case in which Hennepin County kept appealing a small case of damages all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Had reimbursement of the property owner’s attorney’s fees been capped at the contingency fee rate she actually paid, Mr. Morphew would not have been able to represent her and Hennepin County would have been able to take the property without the property owner being able to afford to be represented by Mr. Morphew.

If you or anyone you know are facing the prospect of having their property taken by the government for a public improvement project, they need to be represented by an experience eminent domain attorney. Please have them contact Mr. Morphew at Morphew Law Office.