Utah Supreme Court
Can successful parties recover attorney fees on appeal in Utah? Glew v. Ohio Savings Explained
Summary
Following the Utah Supreme Court’s decision in Glew v. Ohio Savings Bank, 2007 UT 56, appellees petitioned for rehearing to seek attorney fees on appeal. The court treated the petition as a motion for attorney fees and granted the request, remanding for determination of reasonable fees.
Analysis
Background and Facts
In Glew v. Ohio Savings Bank, the Utah Supreme Court previously ruled in favor of appellees Jordan Glew, Maureen Glew, James R. Nichol, and Joan P. Nichol in 2007 UT 56. Following that decision, the appellees sought attorney fees on appeal through a petition for rehearing, rather than the more conventional motion practice. Ohio Savings Bank had been equitably estopped from asserting that the Nichols breached their contract, and the trial court had awarded attorney fees below.
Key Legal Issues
The primary issue was whether appellees could recover attorney fees on appeal after successfully defending their trial court victory. Secondary issues included the proper procedural vehicle for seeking such fees and whether equitable relief could support a fee award under contract.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Supreme Court acknowledged that while attorney fee applications should properly be brought under Rule 23 of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure rather than through rehearing petitions, the rules lack clear direction on this subject. The court treated the petition as a motion for fees and granted it. The court rejected Ohio Savings’ argument that equitable relief cannot support fee awards, explaining that the equitable estoppel provided the rationale for awarding relief “based squarely on a contract.” The court reaffirmed its settled principle that parties who received attorney fee awards below are entitled to fees on appeal when they successfully defend their victory.
Practice Implications
This decision provides important guidance for Utah appellate practitioners regarding attorney fees on appeal. Successful parties should file motions under Rule 23 rather than rehearing petitions to avoid procedural complications. The ruling also clarifies that equitable relief supporting contractual claims can justify attorney fee awards, and that parties who successfully defend trial court victories are generally entitled to appellate attorney fees.
Case Details
Case Name
Glew v. Ohio Savings
Citation
2008 UT 17
Court
Utah Supreme Court
Case Number
No. 20051092
Date Decided
February 22, 2008
Outcome
Remanded
Holding
A party who received an award of attorney fees at trial is entitled to their fees on appeal when they successfully defend that award.
Standard of Review
Not specified in this order
Practice Tip
File motions for attorney fees on appeal under Rule 23 of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure rather than through petitions for rehearing to avoid procedural confusion.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.