Stuart v. Bayless

In this case, we address whether, in a fee dispute between a lawyer and a client, a lawyer may recover, in addition to the fees owed, lost contingency fees from other cases. We conclude that in this case lost contingency fees were not reasonably foreseeable and thus are not recoverable. Accordingly, we reverse the Judgement of the court of appeals in part and affirm in all other respects. 945 S.W.2d 131. Burta Rhodes Raborn, Bobbie Bayless, and the law firm of Bayless & Stokes (B&S) represented Kae Stuart in a divorce proceeding and in two subsequent cases arising out of that divorce. Ultimately, Bayless, B&S, and Raborn (Plaintiffs) sued Stuart to recover their unpaid legal fees and expenses and also sought damages for slander. Stuart counterclaimed and asserted, among other claims, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and legal malpractice. The jury found that Stuart had breached her contracts with Plaintiffs and had committed fraud but failed to find that Stuart had slandered any of the Plaintiffs. The jury rejected Stuart's counterclaim. The trial court rendered judgment against Stuart in accordance with the verdict. In addition to an award for fees due under the fee agreements between Stuart and Plaintiffs, the trial court awarded B&S $500,000 in lost contingent fees that B&S contended it would have earned from other cases. The trial court also awarded mental anguish and punitive damages.