Posts tagged "Sterling"

BourgeoisWhite, LLP v. Sterling Lion, LLC, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-020-17)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us   16-P-45                                         Appeals Court   BOURGEOISWHITE, LLP  vs.  STERLING LION, LLC, & another.[1]     No. 16-P-45.   Worcester.     December 14, 2016. – March 3, 2017.   Present:  Kafker, C.J., Grainger, & Sullivan, JJ.     Practice, Civil, Attorney’s fees, Summary judgment, Waiver. Damages, Attorney’s fees, Breach of contract.  Contract, Attorney, Performance and breach, Waiver.  Attorney at Law, Attorney-client relationship, Fiduciary duty.  Waiver       Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on September 22, 2014.   The case was heard by Shannon Frison, J., on a motion for summary judgment.     Camille F. Sarrouf for the defendants. Samuel J. Miller (Roy A. Bourgeois also present) for the plaintiff.     KAFKER, C.J.  This appeal arises from a fee dispute between a law firm and its former clients.  The plaintiff law firm, BourgeoisWhite, LLP, brought this action against the defendants, Sterling Lion, LLC, and its owner, David G. Massad, alleging breach of contract and unjust enrichment following the plaintiff’s representation of the defendants in an employment dispute.  The judge granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, determining that the plaintiff was owed the $ 83,681.84 amount sought in the complaint, including $ 29,944.45 in “professional courtesy credits” that the plaintiff extended and then rescinded, plus prejudgment interest.[2]  We conclude that the undisputed facts establish that the $ 29,944.45 in credits was written off by the plaintiff law firm and thus waived.  Summary judgment therefore should have been granted in favor of the defendants with respect to the credits.  We further conclude that the defendants have failed to identify any factual disputes as to the reasonableness of the remaining fees, because they rely solely on unsupported and conclusory assertions about the representation.  We therefore remand for the entry of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of the fees sought, less the credits. Background.  The following undisputed facts are set forth in the summary judgment record.  Massad owns Sterling Lion, an Internet-based company that helps homeowners sell their homes without a broker.  Roy Bourgeois, one of the plaintiff’s  partners, had known Massad for many years and previously represented him in unrelated matters. In January, 2012, a former business associate, Dennis Craig, sued Massad and Sterling Lion for alleged violations of the Massachusetts Wage Act, G. L. c. 149, § 148.  Massad hired Bourgeois to represent them in […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - March 3, 2017 at 4:20 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , , ,