Due v. Due
342 So.2d 161 (1977)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An attorney's interest in a pending contingent fee contract is a patrimonial asset acquired during the marriage. To the extent its value is based on services performed during the marriage, it is a community property asset subject to division upon dissolution of the community.
Facts:
- Tatiana Turan Due and Paul H. Due were married.
- Paul H. Due worked as an attorney during the marriage.
- As part of his law practice, Paul H. Due entered into several contingent fee contracts with clients.
- These contracts entitled him to a percentage of any future financial recovery if the clients' cases were successful.
- The marriage between Tatiana and Paul Due was dissolved.
- At the time of the dissolution of the community, several of these contingent fee contracts were still pending, with the underlying cases not yet resolved.
Procedural Posture:
- Tatiana Turan Due sued her former husband, Paul H. Due, in a Louisiana trial court to set aside a community property settlement and to inventory the community assets.
- During discovery, Mrs. Due submitted interrogatories requesting information about Mr. Due's pending contingent fee contracts.
- Mr. Due objected to the interrogatories, arguing the contracts were not community property.
- The trial court sustained Mr. Due's objection.
- Mrs. Due sought review from the court of appeal, which granted supervisory writs.
- The court of appeal reversed the trial court's decision, holding that the contracts were community assets.
- The Supreme Court of Louisiana granted certiorari to review the court of appeal's decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Do an attorney's pending contingent fee contracts, acquired during a marriage, constitute a community property asset that must be accounted for upon the dissolution of the community?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Tate
Yes. An attorney's interest in pending contingent fee contracts is a patrimonial asset that, if acquired during the marriage, constitutes an asset of the community. The court reasoned that under Louisiana law, all property acquired through the labor of either spouse during the marriage belongs to the community. This includes the right to receive money in the future, even if that right is contingent on a future event. The court characterized the attorney's interest as a patrimonial right with pecuniary value, which is created at the time the contract is signed. The court rejected the husband's arguments that the contract's aleatory (uncertain) nature or its status as a revocable mandate negates its status as a community asset, noting that even upon termination of the attorney-client relationship, the attorney or his heirs have an enforceable right to recover the value of services rendered.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the scope of community property in Louisiana, extending it to include intangible, contingent financial interests like an attorney's rights in pending fee contracts. It establishes that the right to earn a future fee, not just the collected fee itself, is the divisible asset. This precedent has a major impact on divorce proceedings involving professionals, particularly lawyers, ensuring that the value created by their labor during the marriage is equitably divided, even if the compensation is not realized until after the community dissolves. The case requires courts to value and partition assets that are uncertain, setting a framework for handling similar contingent interests in other professions.
Unlock the full brief for Due v. Due