Court Reversed Attorney Fee Ruling in Massachusetts

The Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled that self-represented attorneys may recover fees under Chapter 93A.

Updated on Oct. 1, 2026 in Financial Planning

Court Reversed Attorney Fee Ruling in Massachusetts

Live Poll

Should self-represented attorneys be allowed to recover legal fees if they win a lawsuit?

The Massachusetts Appeals Court reversed a decision that denied a self-represented attorney legal fees following a property damage lawsuit. The court remanded the case to determine if the plaintiffs rejected a reasonable settlement offer from Amazon.

Why it matters

The ruling clarifies that an attorney representing themselves is not automatically precluded from seeking legal fees in consumer protection claims. This decision provides guidance on how trial courts must evaluate fee recovery alongside settlement history in Chapter 93A cases.

The litigation involved damages stemming from a 2021 snowstorm, with total awarded damages eventually corrected to $1,561.75. The court rejected the application of federal standards for fee recovery in this state-level consumer protection case.

The players

Massachusetts Appeals Court

This is the intermediate appellate court for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that hears appeals from the trial courts.

Amazon

Amazon is a multinational technology company that serves as the defendant in the underlying property damage negligence lawsuit.

The details

The Massachusetts Appeals Court determined that the plaintiffs' status as a pro se attorney did not bar them from recovering legal fees under state consumer protection statutes. While the court allowed for potential fee recovery, it upheld the denial of treble damages, noting the trial judge found no willful or knowing violation by Amazon.

Damage occurred to the plaintiffs' driveway during a 2021 snowstorm.
The plaintiffs sent a demand letter and received a $500 settlement offer in July 2021.
The plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in District Court in October 2021.
A default judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiffs in early 2022.
The Appeals Court issued its reversal decision on September 18, 2026.

Market Dynamics

The ruling updates the application of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A concerning the recovery of attorney fees. By rejecting the applicability of federal case law from Kay v. Ehrler, the court has clarified the local standards for legal fee compensation in consumer protection suits.

Self-represented litigants in Massachusetts now have clearer judicial support for recovering legal fees in consumer protection disputes. However, the ruling also underscores that fee recovery may still be contingent upon the reasonableness of settlement negotiations conducted during the initial demand phase.

The takeaway

This ruling establishes that being an attorney does not inherently disqualify a plaintiff from seeking legal fees in state consumer protection cases. Individuals handling their own legal matters should meticulously document all settlement offers to ensure they remain eligible for fee reimbursement.