Practice Pointer - Not All Attorneys Fees Provisions Do the Same Thing
A recent Court of Appeals opinion, B. Investment LC v. Anderson, 2012 UT App 24, provides a good reminder that under Utah law, the way an attorneys fees provision is drafted matters. Specifically, there is a line of Utah case law which draws an important distinction between fee provisions which impose fees and costs against an “unsuccessful party” as opposed to a “defaulting party.” Continue reading the expanded entry for a brief explanation of the distinction. If you have thoughts favoring one approach over the other when drafting certain contracts please share.
Continue reading "Practice Pointer - Not All Attorneys Fees Provisions Do the Same Thing" »