KELLY ELIZABETH FRALIN, by
her Guardian ad litem,
GERALDINE ANN FRALIN,
Plaintiff,
v
.
Wake County
No. 00 CVD 1888
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
E. Gregory Stott, for plaintiffs-appellees.
Teague, Rotenstreich & Stanaland, L.L.P., by Kenneth B.
Rotenstreich and Paul A. Daniels, for defendant-appellant.
WYNN, Judge.
Defendant Allstate Insurance Company appeals from an award of
attorney fees to plaintiff under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 6-21.1 and N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 37. We affirm the trial court.
On 26 March 1999, an automobile crashed into the rear of an
automobile operated by Geraldine Ann Fralin with her daughter Kelly
Elizabeth Fralin as a guest passenger. Allstate Insurance Company
insured the Fralin vehicle and initially paid a portion of Kelly's
medical bills under the Med Pay provision of the policy. Butafter Ms. Fralin obtained an attorney who resubmitted the claim for
medical expenses, Allstate Insurance Company refused to pay the
total amount of the medical bills.
Resultantly, Ms. Fralin brought this action on behalf of her
minor daughter to obtain reimbursement for the medical expenses
incurred as result of the 26 March 1999 automobile accident. A
default was entered against Allstate Insurance Company on 11 April
2000 but following the filing of an answer on that same date, the
trial court vacated the entry of default by consent order on 14
April 2000.
On 28 July 2000, Allstate Insurance Company served an offer of
judgment on plaintiff offering to allow judgment against it in the
amount of $1,751 which included principal, interest and court costs
including attorney's fees. On 9 October 2000, the parties
stipulated that plaintiff was entitled to recover from Allstate
Insurance Company medical expenses in the amount of $186 plus
initial filing fees. However, the parties disagreed as to what
amount plaintiff should recover in additional court costs.
On 11 October 2000, plaintiff's attorney submitted an
affidavit and motion for attorney fees. By order dated 17 April
2001, the trial court entered judgment in the amount of $186 for
plaintiff, and taxed costs to Allstate Insurance Company including
attorney fees of $3,800. Dissatisfied with the award of attorney
fees, Allstate Insurance Company appealed to this Court.
------------------------------------------------------
Allstate Insurance Company contends on appeal that the trialcourt erred in awarding attorney fees under N.C. Gen. Stat. §
6-21.1 and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 37. We disagree.
Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 6-21.1, in a suit against an insurance
company in which the insured or beneficiary is the plaintiff, as is
the case here:
upon a finding by the court that there was an
unwarranted refusal by the defendant insurance
company to pay the claim which constitutes the
basis of such suit, instituted in a court of
record, where the judgment for recovery of
damages is ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or
less, the presiding judge may, in his
discretion, allow a reasonable attorney fee to
the duly licensed attorney representing the
litigant obtaining a judgment for damages in
said suit, said attorney's fee to be taxed as
a part of the court costs.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 6-21.1 (2001) (emphasis added). Allstate
Insurance Company argues that the trial court erred in finding that
there was an unwarranted refusal by it to pay the medical payment
claim in this case.
To prevail on a defense against attorney fees under N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 6-21.1, a defendant insurance company must show that the
trial court's ruling was manifestly unsupported by reason or was
so arbitrary that it could not have been the result of a reasoned
decision. Robinson v. Shue, 145 N.C. App. 60, 65, 550 S.E.2d 830,
833 (2001)(quoting State v. Hennis, 323 N.C. 279, 285, 372 S.E.2d
523, 527 (1988)).
In reviewing this assignment of error, we are
also mindful that "the scope of appellate
review . . . is strictly limited to
determining whether the trial judge's
underlying findings of fact are supported by
competent evidence, in which event they are
conclusively binding on appeal, and whetherthose factual findings in turn support the
judge's ultimate conclusions of law."
Id. (quoting State v. Cooke, 306 N.C. 132, 134, 291 S.E.2d 618,
619 (1982)).
In Washington v. Horton, 132 N.C. App. 347, 351, 513 S.E.2d
331, 334-35 (1999), this Court noting that the discretion of a
trial judge in awarding attorney fees under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 6-
21.1 is not unbridled, pointed out in the remand of that case that
the trial judge should consider the entire record in exercising his
discretion, including but not limited to the following factors:
(1) settlement offers made prior to the institution of the action;
(2) offers of judgment pursuant to Rule 68, and whether the
judgment finally obtained was more favorable than such offers; (3)
whether defendant unjustly exercised "superior bargaining power;
(4) in the case of an unwarranted refusal by an insurance company,
the context in which the dispute arose; (5) the timing of
settlement offers; and (6) the amounts of the settlement offers as
compared to the jury verdict.
The record in this case reflects that the trial court complied
with the guidance of Washington v. Horton and made the following
pertinent findings: (1) Allstate Insurance Company made no offers
of settlement in this case before civil action was filed; (2) On
July 28, 2000, Allstate Insurance Company filed an Offer of
Judgment in the amount of $1,751 and on 9 October 2000, the parties
entered into a Stipulation, wherein the defendant agreed that
plaintiff was entitled to recover the total amount of the medical
bills, as she had demanded prior to the institution of this civilaction; (3) Allstate Insurance Company attempted to unjustly
exercise its superior bargaining power in the settlement
negotiation process; (4) This matter arose upon the filing of a
complaint on February 22, 2000, by the plaintiff requesting
reimbursement, pursuant to the Med Pay coverage provisions of the
automobile liability insurance policy of Geraldine Ann Fralin for
medical expenses incurred by the minor child, Kelly Elizabeth
Fralin, for treatment of injuries sustained in an automobile
accident; (5) Allstate Insurance Company did not make any offer of
settlement until after July 28, 2000 at which time the plaintiff's
attorney had already been required to dedicate in excess of 30
hours of his time to the prosecution of this case.
(See footnote 1)
These factors,
supported by competent evidence in the record, support the trial
court's conclusion that plaintiff was entitled to attorney fees
under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 6-21.1.
Moreover, in Epps v. Ewers, 90 N.C. App. 597, 599-600, 369
S.E.2d 104, 105 (1988), this Court held that
[b]ecause G.S. 6-21.1 defines the
circumstances under which attorney's fees may
be awarded, the trial court is not required to
make specific findings as to the plaintiff's
entitlement to such an award . . . At a
minimum, however, the amount of the award must
be supported by some findings as to the
quality and quantity of services rendered by
plaintiff's counsel.
See also Thorpe v. Perry-Riddick, 144 N.C. App. 567, 572, 551
S.E.2d 852, 856 (2001) (Holding that If the trial court elects toaward attorney fees, it must also enter findings of fact as to the
time and labor expended, skill required, customary fee for like
work, and experience or ability of the attorney based on competent
evidence.).
In this case, the trial court awarded fees only for the amount
of time it determined was reasonably spent in prosecuting the
claim, which was less than what plaintiff's attorney had billed,
and at the rate it determined to be customary for the profession.
We hold that Allstate Insurance Company has failed to show that the
trial court abused its discretion in awarding attorney's fees in
this case. See Thorpe v. Perry-Riddick, 144 N.C. App. at 570, 551
S.E.2d at 856 (holding that without a showing of abuse of the trial
judge's discretion, the trial judge's determination to award
counsel fees will not be overturned).
Furthermore, we uphold the trial court's award of attorney
fees under Rule 37(c) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil
Procedure which provides:
If a party fails to admit the genuineness of
any document or the truth of any matter as
requested under Rule 36, and if the party
requesting the admissions thereafter proves
the genuineness of the document or the truth
of the matter, he may apply to the court for
an order requiring the other party to pay him
the reasonable expenses incurred in making
that proof, including reasonable attorney's
fees. The court shall make the order unless it
finds that (1) the request was held
objectionable pursuant to Rule 36(a), or (2)
the admission sought was of no substantial
importance, or (3) the party failing to admit
had reasonable ground to believe that he might
prevail on the matter, or (4) there was other
good reason for the failure to admit.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 37(c) (2001).
In this case, the trial court found:
13. That on April 19, 2000, the plaintiff
filed Requests for Admissions.
14. That the Company denied all of those
Requests For Admission, which related to the
Allstate Insurance Company's responsibility
for the payment of the plaintiff's medical
bills.
15. That because of the company's unwarranted
and inappropriate denial of those Requests for
Admissions, the plaintiff's attorney was
required to expend a considerable amount of
time to prove those facts.
16. That there was an unwarranted refusal by
the Allstate Insurance Company, to pay the
claim, which constitutes the basis of this
suit.
The choice of sanctions under Rule 37 is within the trial court's
discretion and will not be overturned on appeal absent a showing of
abuse of discretion. Brooks v. Giesey, 106 N.C. App. 586, 592,
418 S.E.2d 236, 239 (1992), affirmed, 334 N.C. 303, 432 S.E.2d 339
(1993).
In the order, the trial court pointed out that its findings
were based on evidence showing that the requests for admission were
denied by Allstate Insurance Company for no valid reason; and the
order contained a list of the expenses incurred in establishing the
matters not admitted by Allstate Insurance Company. Moreover,
Allstate Insurance Company fails to provide any authority for its
contention that the trial court's order must distinguish N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 37 sanctions and attorney fees under N.C. Gen.Stat. § 6-21.1.
In sum, we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in
awarding attorney fees in this case; accordingly, the order is,
Affirmed.
Judges McCULLOUGH and BIGGS concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***