Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-5447 Civil GORDON S. BEATTIE AND : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CINDY L. BEATTIE, INDIVIDUALLY : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA AND AS CO-ADMINISTRATORS OF : THE ESTATE OF ALLYSON E. : BEATTIE, DECEASED, : PLAINTIFFS : : V. : : KETHA RANCK, : DEFENDANT : 05-5447 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTION OF GORDON S. BEATTIE FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS BEFORE BAYLEY, J. AND EBERT, J. OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., March 12, 2008:-- Gordon S. Beattie and Cindy L. Beattie, formerly husband and wife, instituted this suit individually and as co-administrators of the estate of their daughter Allyson E. Beattie, against Ketha Ranck. They had separate attorneys. They sought wrongful death damages and survival damages resulting from the death of Allyson on June 19, 2004, when she was a passenger in a vehicle driven by Ketha Ranck. Allyson was age 14, having been born on May 8, 1990. Gordon S. Beattie entered into a written contingent fee agreement with his attorney to pay twenty percent if the case was settled. Cindy L. Beattie entered into a written contingent fee agreement with her attorney to pay twenty-five percent if the case was settled. The case was settled for $925,000, with the bulk of the legal work joint petitionof both plaintiffs performed by Cindy L. Beattie’s attorney. On the , the May 2, 2006 following distribution, with some costs, was approved by this court on : 05-5447 CIVIL TERM 1 To Gordon S. Beattie’s attorney $92,500.00 2 To Cindy L. Beattie’s attorney $115,625.00 To Gordon S. Beattie and Cindy L. Beattie in the wrongful death action $572,189.50 To the Estate of Allyson E. Beattie in their survival action $143,212.98 In a companion case with the same captioned plaintiffs against Erie Insurance Exchange at 04-5733, and with the same attorneys, an uninsured motorist claim was joint petition of both plaintiffs settled for $170,000. On the , the following distribution, November 16, 2004 with some costs, was approved by this court on : 3 To Gordon S. Beattie’s attorney $17,000.00 4 To Cindy L. Beattie’s attorney $21,250.00 To Gordon S. Beattie and Cindy L. Beattie in the wrongful death action $105,000.00 To the Estate of Allyson E. Beattie in their survival action $26,250.00 Under the wrongful death statute these parents share equally in the distribution of the wrongful death settlements. 42 Pa.C.S. § 8301(b). Allyson E. Beattie having died intestate, her parents share equally in her estate. 20 Pa.C.S. §§ 2103(2), 2104(2). __________ 1 $925,000 ÷ 2 = $462,500 x 20% = $92,500.00. 2 $925,000 ÷ 2 = $462,500 x 25% = $115,625.00. 3 $170,000 ÷ 2 = $85,000 x 20% = $17,000.00. 4 $170,000 ÷ 2 = $85,000 x 25% = $21,250.00. -2- 05-5447 CIVIL TERM Notwithstanding the final orders entered on the joint petitions in both cases which set the amount of counsel fees to be paid to each attorney, and the amount of the distributions to the wrongful death actions and the survival actions, Gordon S. October Beattie, using this captioned case against Ketha Ranck, filed a complaint on 18, 2006 , for a declaratory judgment against Cindy L. Beattie. The complaint seeks a declaration “changing the proceeds attributable to [him] with a contingent fee to [his attorney] in the amount of 20% and the funds attributable to Defendant Cindy L. Mayberry Beattie, with a contingent fee to the law firm of [her attorney] in the amount of 25%.” In his complaint, Gordon S. Beattie maintains that the correct interpretation of both contingency fee agreements is that the attorney fee to Cindy L. Beattie’s attorney of 25 percent should be calculated on her one-half of the settlement, and the 20 percent attorney fee due his attorney should be calculated on his one-half of the 5 settlement. Cindy L. Beattie filed an answer to the complaint with new matter, and a response was filed by Gordon S. Beattie. January 15, 2008 On , Gordon S. Beattie filed a motion for a judgment on the February 27, 2008 pleadings which was briefed and argued on . In his brief, Gordon S. Bettie states: [The total recovery in both cases] by both of the parents of Allyson E. Beattie was $1,095,000.00. The one-half share of each of the parents was, consequently $547,500.00. [Cindy L. Beattie’s attorney was] paid 5 That is exactly how the attorney fees were calculated. -3- 05-5447 CIVIL TERM 25% of the juvenile’s mother’s share, specifically, $136,875.00. [Gordon S. Beattie’s attorney was] paid $109,500.00, 20% of the juvenile’s father’s one-half share of the settlement. The amount that is in controversy, and which is being held in escrow by agreement of counsel . . . is $27,375.00. This is the difference between the attorney’s fee charged by [the mother’s attorney] and the attorney’s fee charged by [the father’s attorney]. It is the position of Plaintiff Gordon S. Beattie that he should be paid this sum, since he is entitled to the benefit of the bargain which he struck for a 20% contingent fee. The undersigned believes that it is Defendant Cindy L. Mayberry Beattie’s position that she should be paid the $27,375.00. That would result in each of the parents essentially paying a contingent fee of 22 1/5%. [Gordon S. Beattie maintains] that, since contingent fee agreements must be in writing, and they can only be modified in writing, that the $27,375.00 held in escrow, is actually due and owing to [him]. We are at a loss to discern the legal basis for a complaint for a declaratory judgment to interpret contingent fee contracts between each plaintiff in the same lawsuit in which they sued a third party, which complaint seeks similar relief involving the contingent fee contracts of the two plaintiffs in another lawsuit against a third party. While Pa. Rule of Civil Procedure 1602 provides that “In any civil action, a party may include in a claim for relief a prayer for declaratory relief . . .,” which is ancillary relief, that hardly allows a plaintiff to make a contract claim against another plaintiff in a suit 6 involving their joint claim against a third party. In any event, Gordon S. Beattie is not May 2, 2006 entitled to a judgment on the pleadings. The orders entered on and November 14, 2004 , on his joint petitions with Cindy L. Beattie, directing the amount of attorney fees payable to their respective attorneys, and the distribution of the net __________ 6 If Gordon S. Beattie was dissatisfied with the attorney fees and the orders of distribution approved by this court he should have, in each case, within thirty days after -4- 05-5447 CIVIL TERM proceeds of the settlements, are long since final. Any dispute he may now have regarding his attorney fee or the orders of distribution is not with Cindy L. Beattie. the entry of the orders, filed a petition for reconsideration. -5- 05-5447 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this _________ day of March, 2008, the motion of Gordon S. Beattie IS DENIED. for judgment on the pleadings, By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. James D. Flower, Jr., Esquire For Gordon S. Beattie James Nealon, Esquire For Cindy L. Beattie :sal -6- GORDON S. BEATTIE AND : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CINDY L. BEATTIE, INDIVIDUALLY : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA AND AS CO-ADMINISTRATORS OF : THE ESTATE OF ALLYSON E. : BEATTIE, DECEASED, : PLAINTIFFS : : V. : : KETHA RANCK, : DEFENDANT : 05-5447 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTION OF GORDON S. BEATTIE FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS BEFORE BAYLEY, J. AND EBERT, J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this _________ day of March, 2008, the motion of Gordon S. Beattie IS DENIED. for judgment on the pleadings, By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. James D. Flower, Jr., Esquire For Gordon S. Beattie James Nealon, Esquire For Cindy L. Beattie :sal