Multnomah County Circuit Court Rejects Proportionality Theory and Other Arguments for Capping Attorney Fee Awards

Judge Melvin Oden-Orr recently issued an attorney fee ruling (Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law) in Ciferri v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. Multnomah County Circuit Court Case No. 21CV14243.

Plaintiff Seth Ciferri is a tattoo artist who suffered a theft loss of an estimated $55,000 in vintage tattoo machines from the trunk of his car. State Farm applied a $1,500 business property limitation to the loss. State Farm initially prevailed on its business property theory at court-annexed arbitration. However, following its assessment of plaintiff’s draft motion for partial summary judgment, State Farm agreed to pay the full alleged contract damages of $55,000, and to refer the parties’ attorney fee dispute to the court.

State Farm argued that plaintiff’s fee award should be capped at 33% of plaintiff’s recovery (e.g., $18,000) pursuant to a provision of the original fee agreement between plaintiff and counsel. State Farm also argued that the requested award was disproportionate to the plaintiff’s recovery. The court rejected State Farm’s arguments, and awarded all attorney fees requested in the amount of $234,835, including a 1.25 multiplier.