party opposing claim in Georgia

2008But “a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services. [Cit.]” Mitcham v. Blalock, 214 Ga. App. 29, 32-33 (2) ( 447 SE2d 83 ) (1994).

2008But “a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services. [Cit.]” Mitcham v. Blalock, 214 Ga. App. 29, 32-33 (2) ( 447 SE2d 83 ) (1994).

2002Although there is no error in the court’s imposing an award for attorney fees, a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services. [Cits.] The record does not show [Sawyer] was afforded such an opportunity, and the judgment must be reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine an amount for reasonable and necessary attorney fees. [Cit.] See also Oden v. Legacy Ford-Mercury, 222 Ga. App. 666, 669-670 (3) ( 476 SE2d 43 ) (1996) (hearing required and “(a)t such hearing, each attorney for whos

2002Although there is no error in the court’s imposing an award for attorney fees, a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services. [Cits.] The record does not show [Sawyer] was afforded such an opportunity, and the judgment must be reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine an amount for reasonable and necessary attorney fees. [Cit.] See also Oden v. Legacy Ford-Mercury, 222 Ga. App. 666, 669-670 (3) ( 476 SE2d 43 ) (1996) (hearing required and “(a)t such hearing, each attorney for whos

2020Architecture Contractors Corp., 292 Ga. App. 94, 96 (1) ( 663 SE2d 797 ) (2008) (“[A]n award of attorney fees cannot stand where the plaintiff fails to prove the actual costs of his attorneys and the reasonableness of those costs.”); Kwickie/Flash Foods, Inc. v. Lakeside Petroleum, Inc., 256 Ga. App. 556, 558 (2) ( 568 SE2d 816 ) (2002) (“An award of attorney fees is unauthorized if appellee failed to prove the actual costs of the attorney and the reasonableness of those costs. . . .A party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value

2020Architecture Contractors Corp., 292 Ga. App. 94, 96 (1) ( 663 SE2d 797 ) (2008) (“[A]n award of attorney fees cannot stand where the plaintiff fails to prove the actual costs of his attorneys and the reasonableness of those costs.”); Kwickie/Flash Foods, Inc. v. Lakeside Petroleum, Inc., 256 Ga. App. 556, 558 (2) ( 568 SE2d 816 ) (2002) (“An award of attorney fees is unauthorized if appellee failed to prove the actual costs of the attorney and the reasonableness of those costs. . . .A party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value

2020Architecture Contractors Corp., 292 Ga. App. 94, 96 (1) ( 663 SE2d 797 ) (2008) (“[A]n award of attorney fees cannot stand where the plaintiff fails to prove the actual costs of his attorneys and the reasonableness of those costs.”); Kwickie/Flash Foods, Inc. v. Lakeside Petroleum, Inc., 256 Ga. App. 556, 558 (2) ( 568 SE2d 816 ) (2002) (“An award of attorney fees is unauthorized if appellee failed to prove the actual costs of the attorney and the reasonableness of those costs. . . .A party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value

2020Architecture Contractors Corp., 292 Ga. App. 94, 96 (1) ( 663 SE2d 797 ) (2008) (“[A]n award of attorney fees cannot stand where the plaintiff fails to prove the actual costs of his attorneys and the reasonableness of those costs.”); Kwickie/Flash Foods, Inc. v. Lakeside Petroleum, Inc., 256 Ga. App. 556, 558 (2) ( 568 SE2d 816 ) (2002) (“An award of attorney fees is unauthorized if appellee failed to prove the actual costs of the attorney and the reasonableness of those costs. . . .A party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value

2020Servs., Inc. v. Stevens Aviation, Inc., 249 Ga. App. 514, 518 (6) ( 548 SE2d 485 ) (2001) (“An award of attorney fees is unauthorized if appellee failed to prove the actual costs of the attorney and the reasonableness of those costs. . . .

2020Servs., Inc. v. Stevens Aviation, Inc., 249 Ga. App. 514, 518 (6) ( 548 SE2d 485 ) (2001) (“An award of attorney fees is unauthorized if appellee failed to prove the actual costs of the attorney and the reasonableness of those costs. . . .

2011Compare Tavakolian v. Agio Corp., 304 Ga. App. 660, 664 (3) ( 697 SE2d 233 ) (2010) (holding that party, by conduct, waived the right to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of attorney fees). 10 See Unif.

2011Gaslowitz & Assocs., 230 Ga. App. at 406 (holding that “a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services” (citation and punctuation omitted)); see also Evers v. Evers, 277 Ga. 132, 132 (1) ( 587 SE2d 22 ) (2003) (“A hearing is required in order to enter an award of attorney fees.” (citation omitted)); Sawyer v. Sawyer, 253 Ga. App. 619, 619 (4) ( 560 SE2d 86 ) (2002) (although award of attorney fees was not an abuse of discretion, trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing regarding same).

2011Gaslowitz & Assocs., 230 Ga. App. at 406 (holding that “a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services” (citation and punctuation omitted)); see also Evers v. Evers, 277 Ga. 132, 132 (1) ( 587 SE2d 22 ) (2003) (“A hearing is required in order to enter an award of attorney fees.” (citation omitted)); Sawyer v. Sawyer, 253 Ga. App. 619, 619 (4) ( 560 SE2d 86 ) (2002) (although award of attorney fees was not an abuse of discretion, trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing regarding same).

2011Compare Tavakolian v. Agio Corp., 304 Ga. App. 660, 664 (3) ( 697 SE2d 233 ) (2010) (holding that party, by conduct, waived the right to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of attorney fees). 10 See Unif.

2011Gaslowitz & Assocs., 230 Ga. App. at 406 (holding that “a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services” (citation and punctuation omitted)); see also Evers v. Evers, 277 Ga. 132, 132 (1) ( 587 SE2d 22 ) (2003) (“A hearing is required in order to enter an award of attorney fees.” (citation omitted)); Sawyer v. Sawyer, 253 Ga. App. 619, 619 (4) ( 560 SE2d 86 ) (2002) (although award of attorney fees was not an abuse of discretion, trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing regarding same).

2011Gaslowitz & Assocs., 230 Ga. App. at 406 (holding that “a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services” (citation and punctuation omitted)); see also Evers v. Evers, 277 Ga. 132, 132 (1) ( 587 SE2d 22 ) (2003) (“A hearing is required in order to enter an award of attorney fees.” (citation omitted)); Sawyer v. Sawyer, 253 Ga. App. 619, 619 (4) ( 560 SE2d 86 ) (2002) (although award of attorney fees was not an abuse of discretion, trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing regarding same).

2011Gaslowitz & Assocs., 230 Ga. App. at 406 (holding that “a party opposing a claim for attorney fees has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services” (citation and punctuation omitted)); see also Evers v. Evers, 277 Ga. 132, 132 (1) ( 587 SE2d 22 ) (2003) (“A hearing is required in order to enter an award of attorney fees.” (citation omitted)); Sawyer v. Sawyer, 253 Ga. App. 619, 619 (4) ( 560 SE2d 86 ) (2002) (although award of attorney fees was not an abuse of discretion, trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing regarding same).

1999A98A2350 and A98A2351, Munoz contends the trial court erred in granting the Daily Report’s motion for attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 (a) and (b), because no hearing was held on the issue and there was insufficient evidence to support the award. (a) Right to a hearing on an award of attorney fees: In Cohen v. Feldman, 219 Ga. App. 90, 92 (2) ( 464 SE2d 237 ) (1995), this Court concluded that a party opposing a claim for attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 (b) has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services.

1999A98A2350 and A98A2351, Munoz contends the trial court erred in granting the Daily Report’s motion for attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 (a) and (b), because no hearing was held on the issue and there was insufficient evidence to support the award. (a) Right to a hearing on an award of attorney fees: In Cohen v. Feldman, 219 Ga. App. 90, 92 (2) ( 464 SE2d 237 ) (1995), this Court concluded that a party opposing a claim for attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 (b) has a basic right to confront and challenge testimony as to the value and need for legal services.

1994See Southern Cellular Telecom v. Banks, 209 Ga. App. 401, 402 , supra. This is particularly true where, as in the case sub judice, it is alleged that extensive billings are necessary for pressing a relatively simple matter and where unexplained inconsistencies appear to exist between billing statements to a client and an affidavit filed in support of a claim for attorney fees.