Socorro Electric ordered to pay lawyers’ costs
Socorro Electric Cooperative is being made to pay a total of $13,000 in attorney fees in the case it filed against its member-owners last year.
District Court Judge Albert J. Mitchell Jr. awarded fees to two law firms that represented members, Deschamps & Kortemeier, of Socorro, and the Ikard Wynne law firm, of Austin, Texas.
Descahmps & Kortemeier was ordered to be paid $6,000, while Ikard Wynne is to receive $5,000.
Socorro attorneys Tom Fitch and Polly Tausch, who defended the lawsuit pro se, were awarded $2,000.
The order was filed in 13th Judicial District Court in Los Lunas, where the lawsuit was filed, on Tuesday, Nov. 8. The co-op was ordered to pay within 30 days.
Barring a motion from Soccorro Electric to reconsider the order, this brings a close to the lawsuit the co-op brought against all of its approximately 10,000 members in June 2010. The co-op filed suit in an effort to block newly adopted bylaws that require the co-op to follow open meeting laws and the Inspection of Public Records Act.
Judge Mitchell ruled against the co-op in May, saying the bylaws were properly adopted and binding, but didn’t declare whether any attorney fees would be awarded. He did invite the prevailing attorneys to file motions for fees, each of which was answered by co-op attorneys.
In the end, Mitchell cited in his order the Open Meetings Act — the very law Socorro Electric contested did not apply to co-ops — which allows for reasonable attorney’s fees to be awarded to a successful party.
Mitchell said the decision whether to award fees was challenging due to the unusual nature of the case, but he felt it was in “the interest of justice” that attorneys defending the case received fees.
“I thought it was the right thing to do under the law,” Mitchell said in a phone interview from Mosquero, where he typically holds court. “The law gives a lot of discretion on that matter, and in this case I thought the best thing to do under the law is what’s written in the order.”
The attorneys didn’t get all they asked for. Deschamps & Kortemeier were seeking a little more than $7,600. Ikard Wynne asked for more than $18,000, and Fitch and Tausch together sought $3,800.
Mitchell said the final determination was based on the “reasonableness of the fees requested, as compared to the requested,” as well as the briefings presented by all the parties.
Mitchell said more than once during the hearings that he was concerned about minimizing the damage to members, who not only were defendants in the case but ultimately bear the cost of the litigation filed against them as owners of the private, non-profit corporation. The judge said he had little discretion on that issue.
“The current status of the matter is that it was the co-op who was the one who was not doing what it was supposed to be doing,” the judge said.
Some of the attorneys defending the case suggested in their motions for fees that members of the board of trustees and the co-op attorney be made to pay, since the case was brought about through their actions.
“I make an assumption the board of directors know what they’re doing. If they don’t, they should step aside and let someone else step in,” Mitchell said. “Also, if you read the bylaws it says that the co-op will indemnify the trustees for any legal proceedings.”
Mitchell also said he felt the co-op brought the lawsuit in good faith.
“I didn’t feel they were advancing an argument that was silly,” he said.
The $13,000 accounts for only a fraction of the total cost of the lawsuit. A final figure can’t be put to it, but fees the co-op paid to its attorney in 2010 increased by nearly $34,000 over the previous two-year average. Also, as of last month the co-op hadn’t received any kind of bill from the Kennedy Han law firm of Albuquerque, which was hired to assist the co-op in its case and has been actively involved.
And more fees will be forthcoming. Kennedy Han is currently representing the co-op in a countersuit that calls for class action certification (see sidebar this page).
Contact T.S. Last