Gregg v. Ameriprise Financial - Pa. Superior Court – June 30, 2022- non-precedential**
The purpose of the UTPCPL is to protect the public from fraud and unfair or deceptive business practices. See 73 P.S. §§ 201-2., 201-3. To facilitate that goal, in addition to other relief, the statute permits a court to award costs and reasonable attorney fees. See 73 P.S. § 201-9.2(a);see also Krishnan v. Cutler Group, Inc., 171 A.3d 856, 871 (Pa. Super. 2017). In cases involving a lawsuit that includes claims under the UTPCPL, a trial court considers the following factors when assessing the reasonableness of counsel fees:
(1) [t]he time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved and the skill requisite properly to conduct the case;
(2) [t]he customary charges of the members of the bar for similar services;
(3) [t]he amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting to the clients from the services; and
(4)[t]he contingency or certainty of the compensation.
Sewak v. Lockhart, 699 A.2d 755, 762 (Pa. Super. 1997), abrogated on other grounds, 245 A.3d 637, 648 (Pa. 2021).
+++
** An unreported decision of the Superior Court can be cited for its persuasive value, but not as binding precedent pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 126(b).
