Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Electric Man, Inc. v. Charos, 179 Vt. 351 (2006)

Citation
Electric Man, Inc. v. Charos, 179 Vt. 351 (2006)
Parent Document
Electric Man, Inc. v. Charos, 179 Vt. 351 (2006)
Jurisdiction
Vermont (state)
Effective Date
2006-02-10

Full Text

685 chars
¶ 14. Before addressing the relief appropriate for the trial court’s general error in addressing the attorneys’-fee award, we turn to contractor’s additional argument that the court erred in failing to award fees related to mediation. The trial court ruled that it would not award attorneys’ fees associated with mandatory or voluntary mediation in this case because “both parties must participate in such mediation.” This rationale for refusing to award attorneys’ fees in mediation activity is cryptic and, with respect to the voluntary mediation, partially inaccurate. Many of the steps in litigation are mandatory; we do not understand what differentiates mediation in that regard.