Facts: Iris Legal Law Corporation (Law Firm) represented clients (the Purcells) in litigation until a dispute over fees arose. The Purcells claimed the retainer agreement was amended to defer payment until trial conclusion, which the Law Firm denied. The Master found the agreement unamended and the fees reasonable, but on appeal, a judge ordered a rehearing, citing procedural errors.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Master erred by having the Purcells present their case first and whether there was a failure to confirm the existence and terms of the retainer agreement before examining its potential amendment.

Court's Ruling: The Court of Appeal found no procedural error in the order of presentation, holding it within the Master's discretion. It ruled the retainer agreement was adequately established, allowing the appeal, restoring the Master’s decision, and remitting the costs appeal back to the Supreme Court.

Costs/Damages: The original ruling in favor of the Law Firm for the disputed fees was reinstated, but the issue of costs was sent back to the Supreme Court for review.