Legal Opinion

Bearden v. McGill

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided February 21, 2017No. 72926-8-IPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLeach, J.

¶1 MAR 7.3 and RCW 7.06.060(1) require that a party who appeals an arbitration award and fails to improve its position at a trial de novo pay the costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the opposing party after the request for the trial.1 The purpose of these provisions is to “encourage settlement and discourage meritless appeals.”2

¶2 Dolphus McGill appeals the trial court’s award of $71,800 in attorney fees to James Bearden. McGill claims that he improved his position at a trial de novo he requested. In an earlier opinion,3 we agreed. We stated that a trial court should include in its…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Niccum v. EnquistWashington Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Cormar, Ltd. v. SauroCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1991
  3. Dolphus Mcgill v. James BeardonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
  4. Nelson v. EricksonWashington Supreme Court · 2016

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Maria Hedger v. Lisa Groeschell And John Doe GroeschellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
  2. Bearden v. McGillWashington Supreme Court · 2018
  3. Bearden v. McGillWashington Supreme Court · 2018
  4. Bearden v. McGillWashington Supreme Court · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API