-5- Attorney’s Fees and Payment The trial court granted petitioner’s attorney’s motions for attorney’s fees under FEHA’s fee-shifting statute. The State of California ultimately paid petitioner $2,349,039 (the jury award) in 2002, which included the economic and non-economic damages, statutory attorney’s fees, and interest. The attorney’s fees under FEHA’s fee-shifting statute plus interest thereon totaled $537,841. Petitioner agreed, however, to pay Mr. Faust a fee of 40 percent of the jury award, $928,576. The State of California also issued petitioner Form 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income, to report the $2,355,039 jury award.3 Petitioner and her husband met with attorney Robert Wood to discuss the tax implications of the jury award. Mr. Wood is a nationally renowned expert on the taxation of legal awards. Before the meeting, Mr. Wood reviewed several documents related to the trial and the Form 1099-MISC the State issued to petitioner. The record is not clear what tax advice, if any, Mr. Wood rendered. The Income Tax Return for 2002 and the Deficiency Notice Petitioner and her husband timely filed tax returns for 2002 as married persons filing separately. Petitioner and her husband 3The amount of the check is $6,000 less than the amount on the Form 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income. Respondent concedes that petitioner did not actually receive, and is therefore not taxable on, this $6,000.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011