Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1991–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Graddick v. First Farmers & Merchants Nat.green2 sentences2025See Beal Bank, 896 So. 2d at 403 (" 'Indeed, there would hardly ever be a case where the application of attorney's fees brought into play every criterion.' " (quoting Graddick v. First Farmers & Merchants Nat'l Bank of Troy, 453 So. 2d 1305, 1311 (Ala. 1984))). 3 3We recognize that, in practice, some kinds of evidence may be less relevant depending on the petitioner's theory of how the attorney fees should be calculated. 2015See, e.g., Graddick v. First Farmers & Merchants Nat’l Bank of Troy, 453 So.2d 1305, 1311 (Ala.1984). . | 2 | 2 |
Beal Bank, SSB v. Schillecigreen2 sentences2025See, e.g., Beal Bank, SSB v. Schilleci, 896 So. 2d 395, 397-98, 403 (Ala. 2004) (holding that Peebles factors apply when attorney fees sought for time consumed on the case); Pharmacia, supra (applying the Peebles factors to a flat-fee award); and Madison Cnty. 2025See, e.g., Beal Bank, SSB v. Schilleci, 896 So. 2d 395, 397-98, 403 (Ala. 2004) (holding that Peebles factors apply when attorney fees sought for time consumed on the case); Pharmacia, supra (applying the Peebles factors to a flat-fee award); and Madison Cnty. | 1 | 3 |
Peebles v. Mileygreen2 sentences2025Finally, Dodgen concluded that the amount of time and the actual cost billed to HexFed was "very reasonable given the scope of the case and the work that was done" and noted that he had considered the factors set forth in this Court's decision in Peebles v. Miley, 439 So. 2d 137 (Ala. 1983) ("the Peebles factors"), in reaching this conclusion. 2025Finally, Dodgen concluded that the amount of time and the actual cost billed to HexFed was "very reasonable given the scope of the case and the work that was done" and noted that he had considered the factors set forth in this Court's decision in Peebles v. Miley, 439 So. 2d 137 (Ala. 1983) ("the Peebles factors"), in reaching this conclusion. | 1 | 2 |
Van Schaack v. Amsouth Bank, N.A.green2 sentences2025The Peebles factors have been summarized as follows: "(1) the nature and value of the subject matter of the employment; (2) the learning, skill, and labor requisite to its proper discharge; (3) the time consumed; (4) the professional experience and reputation of the attorney; (5) the weight of 17 SC-2024-0308 his responsibilities; (6) the measure of success achieved; (7) the reasonable expenses incurred; (8) whether a fee is fixed or contingent; (9) the nature and length of a professional relationship; (10) the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services; (11) the likeli 2025The Peebles factors have been summarized as follows: "(1) the nature and value of the subject matter of the employment; (2) the learning, skill, and labor requisite to its proper discharge; (3) the time consumed; (4) the professional experience and reputation of the attorney; (5) the weight of 17 SC-2024-0308 his responsibilities; (6) the measure of success achieved; (7) the reasonable expenses incurred; (8) whether a fee is fixed or contingent; (9) the nature and length of a professional relationship; (10) the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services; (11) the likeli | 1 | 2 |
Madison County Department of Human Resources v. T.S. Ex Rel. F.M.green2 sentences2025Res. v. T.S., 53 So. 3d 38, 44-45 (Ala. 2009) (applying the Peebles factors to a contingency-fee award). 2025Res. v. T.S., 53 So. 3d 38, 44-45 (Ala. 2009) (applying the Peebles factors to a contingency-fee award). | 1 | 1 |
Moultrie v. Wallgreen2 sentences2025See Moultrie v. Wall, 143 So. 3d 128, 137 (Ala. 2013). 2025See Moultrie v. Wall, 143 So. 3d 128, 137 (Ala. 2013). | 1 | 1 |
Pharmacia Corp. v. McGowangreen2 sentences2025See, e.g., Beal Bank, SSB v. Schilleci, 896 So. 2d 395, 397-98, 403 (Ala. 2004) (holding that Peebles factors apply when attorney fees sought for time consumed on the case); Pharmacia, supra (applying the Peebles factors to a flat-fee award); and Madison Cnty. 2025See, e.g., Beal Bank, SSB v. Schilleci, 896 So. 2d 395, 397-98, 403 (Ala. 2004) (holding that Peebles factors apply when attorney fees sought for time consumed on the case); Pharmacia, supra (applying the Peebles factors to a flat-fee award); and Madison Cnty. | 1 | 1 |
Hensley v. Eckerhartgreen2 sentences2025Compare Peebles, 439 So. 2d at 141-42 (noting that, generally, trial courts first consider the time consumed, then adjust based on the other Peebles factors, including "the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services"), with Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983) (noting that the federal "lodestar" method involves multiplying the reasonable hours worked by a reasonable rate, then considering factors that adjust the fee upward or downward). 23 SC-2024-0308 see, e.g., Beal Bank, 896 So. 2d at 408-09 , so that the trial court can then use that information to make it 2025Compare Peebles, 439 So. 2d at 141-42 (noting that, generally, trial courts first consider the time consumed, then adjust based on the other Peebles factors, including "the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services"), with Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983) (noting that the federal "lodestar" method involves multiplying the reasonable hours worked by a reasonable rate, then considering factors that adjust the fee upward or downward). 23 SC-2024-0308 see, e.g., Beal Bank, 896 So. 2d at 408-09 , so that the trial court can then use that information to make it | 1 | 1 |
Lolley v. Citizens Bankgreen2 sentences2015Considering all the foregoing, we believe the correct result in this case is to reverse the circuit court’s order insofar as it determined the amount of the attorney fees and to remand this case for the circuit court (1) to conduct a hearing in which both sides can introduce the evidence necessary to allow the circuit court to more fully consider the Peebles factors arid (2) to issue an order that is consistent with this opinion and' that “aIlow[s] for meaningful review by articulating the decisions made, the reasons supporting those decisions, and the performance of the attorney-fee calculati 2015Considering all the foregoing, we believe the correct result in this case is to reverse the circuit court’s order insofar as it determined the amount of the attorney fees and to remand this case for the circuit court (1) to conduct a hearing in which both sides can introduce the evidence necessary to allow the circuit court to more fully consider the Peebles factors arid (2) to issue an order that is consistent with this opinion and' that “aIlow[s] for meaningful review by articulating the decisions made, the reasons supporting those decisions, and the performance of the attorney-fee calculati | 1 | 1 |
Edelman & Combs v. Lawgreen2 sentences2000See Edelman Combs , 663 So.2d at 960 (applying the Peebles factors generally to class actions). 2000See Edelman Combs , 663 So.2d at 960 (applying the Peebles factors generally to class actions). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Evans v. Waldrop
neutral
2 sentences2017Furthermore, even assuming that the trial court erred in determining that the firm was not a real party in interest and that it lacked capacity to enforce the fee contract, "[t]his court may affirm the trial court's judgment for any legitimate reason supported by the record." Evans v. Waldrop , 220 So.3d 1066 , 1073 (Ala. Civ. 2017Furthermore, even assuming that the trial court erred in determining that the firm was not a real party in interest and that it lacked capacity to enforce the fee contract, "[t]his court may affirm the trial court's judgment for any legitimate reason supported by the record." Evans v. Waldrop , 220 So.3d 1066 , 1073 (Ala. Civ. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
City of Birmingham v. Horn
green
2 sentences2015Considering all the foregoing, we believe the correct result in this case is to reverse the circuit court’s order insofar as it determined the amount of the attorney fees and to remand this case for the circuit court (1) to conduct a hearing in which both sides can introduce the evidence necessary to allow the circuit court to more fully consider the Peebles factors arid (2) to issue an order that is consistent with this opinion and' that “aIlow[s] for meaningful review by articulating the decisions made, the reasons supporting those decisions, and the performance of the attorney-fee calculati 2015Considering all the foregoing, we believe the correct result in this case is to reverse the circuit court’s order insofar as it determined the amount of the attorney fees and to remand this case for the circuit court (1) to conduct a hearing in which both sides can introduce the evidence necessary to allow the circuit court to more fully consider the Peebles factors arid (2) to issue an order that is consistent with this opinion and' that “aIlow[s] for meaningful review by articulating the decisions made, the reasons supporting those decisions, and the performance of the attorney-fee calculati | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Strong v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.
green
2 sentences2000To aid the trial court in its further analysis of the Peebles factors, specifically in its determining if a multiplier is warranted under the lodestar method of setting an attorney fee, we call to the trial court's attention Strong v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. , 173 F.R.D. 167 (W.D.La. 1997), aff'd , 137 F.3d 844 (5th Cir. 1998). 2000To aid the trial court in its further analysis of the Peebles factors, specifically in its determining if a multiplier is warranted under the lodestar method of setting an attorney fee, we call to the trial court's attention Strong v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. , 173 F.R.D. 167 (W.D.La. 1997), aff'd , 137 F.3d 844 (5th Cir. 1998). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Strong v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc.
green
2 sentences2000To aid the trial court in its further analysis of the Peebles factors, specifically in its determining if a multiplier is warranted under the lodestar method of setting an attorney fee, we call to the trial court's attention Strong v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. , 173 F.R.D. 167 (W.D.La. 1997), aff'd , 137 F.3d 844 (5th Cir. 1998). 2000To aid the trial court in its further analysis of the Peebles factors, specifically in its determining if a multiplier is warranted under the lodestar method of setting an attorney fee, we call to the trial court's attention Strong v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. , 173 F.R.D. 167 (W.D.La. 1997), aff'd , 137 F.3d 844 (5th Cir. 1998). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Reynolds v. First Alabama Bank of Montgomery
green
2 sentences1995This has generally worked out to be the rule in our State, . . . but this is not to say that there have not been courts that have assessed one-third, or even higher fees which we, after reading the decisions, also conclude were reasonable." Reynolds v. First Alabama Bank of Montgomery, N.A. , 471 So.2d 1238 , 1245 (Ala. 1985). 1995This has generally worked out to be the rule in our State, . . . but this is not to say that there have not been courts that have assessed one-third, or even higher fees which we, after reading the decisions, also conclude were reasonable." Reynolds v. First Alabama Bank of Montgomery, N.A. , 471 So.2d 1238 , 1245 (Ala. 1985). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Gaines, Gaines & Gaines, PC v. HARE
green
2 sentences1991The court in Gaines applied the Peebles factors also. 554 So.2d at 449 . 1991The court in Gaines applied the Peebles factors also. 554 So.2d at 449 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |