City of Arlington v. Lummus
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
*537OPINION
FARRIS, Justice.
The City of Arlington (City) appeals a judgment awarding Jameson & Maxwell (J & M) one-third attorney’s fees from the City’s workers’ compensation subrogation recovery, complaining the judgment is inconsistent with the court’s conclusion the City was actively represented by its own lawyer who actively participated in obtaining the recovery, and J & M did not establish the value of its services. Because the trial court apportioned the fees and did not abuse its discretion in awarding one-third attorney’s fees to J & M, we overrule the City’s points of error, we affirm…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- City of Austin v. JanowskiCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1992
- Hartford Insurance Co. v. Branton & Mendelsohn, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1984
- Twin City Fire Insurance Co. v. Jones, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1992
- Insurance Co. of North America v. StuebingCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1980
- Vanguard Insurance Co. v. HumphreyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1987
3Cited by4 opinions
- Benchmark Insurance Company v. Robert William Sullivan, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2009
- Benchmark Insurance Company v. Robert William Sullivan, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2009
- Jorge Delgado v. Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2009
- Jorge Delgado v. Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2009