Legal Opinion

Stimac v. State

Montana Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1991No. 90-501PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hunt

Defendant, the State of Montana, appeals from an order of the District Court of the Eighth Judicial District, Cascade County, awarding an attorneys fee in accordance with the one-third contingent-fee agreement entered into between the plaintiffs and their attorney. We affirm.

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the District Court abused its discretion in awarding the full amount of the plaintiffs’ contingent-fee agreement as a reasonable attorneys fee under § 39-3-214(1), MCA.

The plaintiffs are fire fighters employed by the State of Montana, Department of Military Affairs, and stationed…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Wight v. Hughes Livestock Co., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Clark v. SageIdaho Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Glaspey v. WorkmanMontana Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Glaspey v. WorkmanMontana Supreme Court · 1988

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Riordan v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  2. Newman v. Scottsdale InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Kuhr v. City of BillingsMontana Supreme Court · 2007
  4. McKamey v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 1994
  5. West v. Club at Spanish Peaks, L.L.C.Montana Supreme Court · 2008

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API