Todd W. Musburger, Ltd. v. Meier
not provided (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An attorney discharged by a client from a contingent-fee representation is entitled to recover the reasonable value of services rendered on a quantum meruit basis, even if the client did not receive a tangible benefit from those services prior to the discharge.
Facts:
- In September 2002, radio personality Garry Meier orally retained the law firm Todd W Musburger, Ltd. to negotiate a renewal of his employment contract with WLS-AM radio.
- The parties agreed to operate under the terms of a prior written agreement, which stipulated a 5% commission on the gross value of any contract negotiated by the firm.
- From September 2002 to September 2003, the firm, including attorney Todd Musburger and his non-attorney son Brian, performed extensive negotiation services, research, and strategy development.
- The firm secured several offers from WLS, including a 10-year, $12 million proposal, which Meier deemed unacceptable.
- On September 11, 2003, Meier instructed Todd Musburger to cease all negotiations for one week.
- Believing a pause would be detrimental, Musburger continued negotiations during that period by meeting with a WLS representative.
- On September 22, 2003, Meier sent a letter to the firm, formally terminating their services as his agent and legal representative.
- The firm subsequently billed Meier $92,750 for its services based on hourly rates, which Meier refused to pay.
Procedural Posture:
- Todd W Musburger, Ltd. filed a three-count complaint against Garry Meier in the circuit court of Cook County for breach of contract, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment.
- The trial court dismissed the breach of contract and unjust enrichment counts prior to trial.
- The quantum meruit claim proceeded to a jury trial.
- The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff law firm for $68,750.
- The trial court entered judgment on the jury's verdict.
- Defendant Meier filed a post-trial motion for a new trial, which the trial court denied.
- Defendant Meier also filed a section 2-1401 petition to vacate the judgment, alleging the plaintiff was a non-entity, which the trial court denied.
- Meier (appellant) appealed the denial of his post-trial motion and his section 2-1401 petition to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, with Todd W Musburger, Ltd. as appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an attorney discharged by a client before the completion of a contingent-fee contract have a right to recover the reasonable value of services rendered, under a theory of quantum meruit, even if the services did not result in a finalized contract for the client?
Opinions:
Majority - Presiding Justice Robert E. Gordon
Yes. An attorney discharged from a contingent-fee contract may be compensated for the reasonable value of services rendered before the discharge on a quantum meruit basis. When a client exercises their right to discharge their attorney, the contingent-fee contract ceases to exist and cannot be enforced. However, the attorney is entitled to recover in quantum meruit, which literally means 'as much as he deserves,' based on the implied promise of a recipient of valuable services to pay for them to avoid unjust enrichment. Citing precedent from Much Shelist, the court held that the lack of a tangible benefit or final recovery for the client does not bar the attorney from recovering fees. The court also affirmed that fees for necessary services provided by a non-attorney employee are recoverable if they are not general overhead costs. Meier's other defenses were rejected, holding that the Illinois Private Employment Agency Act does not apply to attorneys negotiating employment contracts and that the incorrect naming of the plaintiff law firm was a correctable misnomer, not a fatal defect.
Concurring - Justice Garcia
The justice concurred in the judgment without a separate written opinion.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms the established Illinois doctrine that a client's absolute right to discharge an attorney is balanced by the attorney's right to be compensated for the reasonable value of work performed. The case clarifies that quantum meruit recovery is not dependent on the ultimate success or tangible benefit to the client, but rather on the value of the services themselves. Furthermore, it provides important guidance on the scope of recoverable fees, allowing for compensation for specialized, non-legal work performed by non-attorney staff, so long as that work is not mere overhead. This precedent strengthens the position of attorneys in fee disputes following a discharge and affects how law firms can bill for paralegal and other professional staff services in quantum meruit actions.
Unlock the full brief for Todd W. Musburger, Ltd. v. Meier