Invariably, when I represent someone or a company that gets sued, early questions from my client include “how can they just sue me?”, “don’t they have to have proof?,” and “can I get my attorney fees after we win the defense?” Let me discuss the attorney fee question. It’s extremely rare, absent a contract or statute that provides for attorney fees, for a successful party to recover attorney fees from the losing party. Usually, upon successfully defending a case the only way you can recover your attorney fees is if the lawsuit against you had absolutely no basis in law or fact or was brought for an improper purpose. One such claim for attorney fees is called “abuse of process.”
Abuse of process is the use of legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it was not designed. The improper purpose is ordinarily an attempt to secure from another some collateral advantage not properly includable in the process itself and is a form of extortion in which a lawfully used process is perverted to an unlawful use. An abuse of process can occur even though there is probable cause to bring the action and the original action terminates in favor of the plaintiff. At the same time, the mere failure of a legal claim, without more, furnish proof of some attempt to gain a collateral advantage by pursuit of the claim. Any type of legal claim, including business or contract law cases, motor vehicle accidents, motorcycle crashes, dog bite cases, private nuisance actions, employment law matters, construction defect claims, personal injury or wrongful death claims, or products liability claims, can be improper and thus expose the party bringing the action to a later abuse of process claim.
To prove a claim of abuse of process, a plaintiff must show (1) use of the legal process, (2) in an improper or unauthorized manner, and (3) that damages were sustained as a result of the abuse. With respect to the second element of the cause of action for abuse of process, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant used the legal process primarily for an impermissible or illegal motive. Id.
A very restrictive view is taken of the “impermissible or illegal motive element.” Proof of an improper motive by the person filing the lawsuit for even a malicious purpose does not satisfy this element. This is so to protect the right to ready access to the courts. An ulterior motive does not alone satisfy the requirement for an action in abuse of process; a definite act or threat outside the process is required. Consequently, this is a difficult element to establish.
All of this is true as long as the act that is alleged to be improper is in fact proper in the regular prosecution of the proceeding. A defendant is not liable if it has done no more than carry the process to its authorized conclusion, even with bad intentions. There is no action for abuse of process when the process is used for the purpose for which it is intended, but there is an incidental motive of spite or an ulterior purpose of benefit to the defendant. For abuse of process to occur there must be use of the process for an immediate purpose other than that for which it was designed and intended. The usual case of abuse of process is one of some form of extortion, using the process to put pressure upon the other to compel him to pay a different debt or to take some other action or refrain from it.
Any act that is proper in the regular prosecution of a proceeding cannot be relied upon as a basis for an abuse of process claim. Rather, to show abuse of process, a plaintiff must show defendants took some specific action in connection with their use of process which can be characterized as unlawful or irregular. In other words, plaintiff must show defendants committed some act in the use of process that was not proper in the regular prosecution of the proceeding. Proof of an improper motive by the person filing a lawsuit, even a malicious purpose, does not satisfy that element.
Abuse of process will not lie for a civil action that inconveniences a defendant, or for one filed in expectation of settlement (a “nuisance” suit). Wilson, 464 N.W.2d at 267. Settlement is included in the goals of proper process, even if the suit is frivolous. Id. Additionally, there is no abuse of process when the action is filed to intimidate and embarrass a defendant knowing there is no entitlement to recover the full amount of damages sought. Id.
Recent Comments