Facts

On or about Aug. 31, 2005, plaintiff Blaine John Chaney retained defendant Ronald W. Grigg as his legal counsel to assist him in his divorce proceeding. His wife was Sarah MacMillan Chaney, a wealthy heiress. Plaintiff had previously been represented by Lance Spiegel, a wealth management specialist, and Timothy Lappen, a well-known family law expert.

Grigg had plaintiff enter into two retainer agreements, one on an hourly basis and the other on a contingency basis. Plaintiff alleged Grigg had improperly induced him to enter into the contingency retainer agreement five months after the hourly retainer agreement was signed.

The divorce was amicably resolved by way of a confidential settlement agreement, executed on Jan. 12, 2006. The dissolution judgment was entered on March 2, 2006.

Pursuant to the settlement agreement, Sarah MacMillan Chaney and her agents transferred over $3.5 million dollars into Grigg's Client Trust Account. These were payments that plaintiff was entitled to receive pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement. Plaintiff alleged that Grigg improperly withdrew close to $2.4 million dollars from Grigg's Client Trust Account as purported attorney's fees under the two retainer agreements.

Plaintiff subsequently sued defendants, Ronald W. Grigg and Mary Whitman, for breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, accounting, unjust enrichment, fraud and deceit, imposition of constructive trust, declaratory relief, and legal malpractice related to a divorce proceeding. On defendants' petition, the matter was sent to arbitration. The Arbitrator found the fee scheme utilized by Grigg to be unconscionable and "so exorbitant and wholly disproportionate to the services performed as to shock the conscience of those to whose attention it is called."

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that the contingency retainer agreement was void as it was against public policy in a divorce proceeding. Further, plaintiff contended that Grigg had improperly induced plaintiff to sign a contingency retainer agreement giving 15% of plaintiff's gross recovery in the divorce proceeding. Plaintiff argued that the fee scheme Grigg had plaintiff enter into was unconscionable, as Grigg had charged plaintiff both on the hourly retainer agreement and the contingency retainer agreement for the same work and for work related only to a divorce proceeding.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended that the retainer agreements were valid and that Grigg was entitled to over $4.5 million dollars as earned fees pursuant to the contingency retainer agreement.

Damages

Grigg allegedly misappropriated over $2 million dollars transferred for the benefit of plaintiff into Grigg's Client Trust Account.

Result

On March 15, 2010, the Court confirmed the arbitration award and entered judgment in favor of Chaney for $3,030,085.45 plus interest of 10 percent per annum. On June 2, 2010, a permanent injunction was granted in plaintiff's favor to aid in the enforcement of the judgment. Among its ten provisions, it ordered Grigg to give a full and complete accounting of the use of and information concerning the present whereabouts of the funds made to or for the benefit of Chaney deposited, transferred or wired into Grigg's Client Trust Account or other accounts in the name of Grigg or used by Grigg. On September 16, 2011, Grigg was found to be guilty of contempt for willfully failing to comply with the June 2, 2010 court order.

Other Information

Less than a week after hearing the parties' oral argument on Oct. 11, 2011, the judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals on Oct. 18, 2011.