Recent Articles
Sanctions: Total Sanctions Of $6,000 Under CCP § 128.7, $5,000 To The Primary Defendant And $1,000 To The Lower Court, Was No Abuse Of Discretion Given Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Being Unable To Explain Why They Opposed A Stay Motion And Given Delegation To A Contract Attorney Who Cited To Non-Existent Cases, Hallucinations, And Citations Which Did Not Exist In Cases Relied On In The Stay Opposition
Attorneys’ Safe Harbor/Technical § 128.7 Arguments Were Forfeited Because They Were Not Raised Before The Lower Court—Not To Mention Attorneys Could Have Withdrawn Their Stay…
In The News: California Judicial Council Releases Court Statistics For 2015-16 Through 2024-25, As Well As For 2024-2025
The Reports Shows Statistics For CA Supreme Court Review Grants, DCA Publication Rates, DCA Disposition Rates, and Superior Court Disposition Rates. On the California…
Class Actions, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: $2.274 Million Fee Award To Class Counsel, Where The Case Settled For $575,000, Was No Abuse Of Discretion
Plaintiffs Had Asked For About $7.465 Million Inclusive Of A 2.0 Positive Multiplier, With The Appellate Court Rebuffing That Any Further Reduction Was Justified. Defendant…
Discovery: Discovery Sanctions Against Employee, With Respect To Two Sets Of Third-Party Subpoenas, Are Affirmed On Appeal
$12,500 Was The Sanctions Tab Against A Third-Party Law Firm; $11,517.50 Was The Sanctions Award Against Another Third Party. We have related sanctions awards to…
Section 1717: $89,950 Postjudgment Fee Award Under Civil Code Section 1717 Is Affirmed On Appeal
Nothing Showed The Jury Earlier Had Awarded Fees As Damages, With The Prevailing Party’s Section 1717 Fee Request Being Incident To Prevailing Party’s Principal Cause…
Family Law: Disparity In Financial Conditions Justified An Award Of Family Code Section 2030 Fees To Ex-Husband Of $371,438.55
Ex-Wife Paid Nearly Double The Amount Of Fees To Her Attorney And She Would Get Trust Loans To Pay Ex-Husband, Justifying The Family Court Award….
Employment, Lodestar, Multipliers: Reduced $733,440 Fee Award In PAGA/Labor Violations Case, From Requested $1.047 Million Lodestar, Was Sustained On Appeal
Non-Complexity Of Issues, Lack Of Success From Stated Goals, And Upward Adjustment Of Past Hourly Rates To Future Periods Of The Litigation Justified The .07…
In The News, Sanctions: Prominent L.A. Firm Sanctioned Almost $3 Million For Not Being Candid With A District Judge Or Opponent On Expert Discovery Issues
Some Of The Sanctions Were Apportioned Separately Against Supervising Partners And Mid-Level Associates, With Some Of The Attorneys Having To Submit To Ethical Curriculum Requirements—In…
Appeal Sanctions: 2/6 DCA Awards $12,590.20 To Respondent And $8,500 To Court Clerk For Prosecuting A Frivolous Appeal
Appeal Of $72,476.87 Sanctions Award Against Ex-Husband Deemed Frivolous. Just to give you a sense of the dollar amounts of appellate sanctions imposed in one…
SLAPP: Landlord, Successfully Defending Against A SLAPP Motion Against Tenants, Was Not Entitled To SLAPP Fees Awarded By The Lower Court
Reason Was That The Grant Of Fees/Costs Was Summarily Made, Not Meeting Specificity Requirements Under CCP § 128.5. Although we have not looked at the…
Family Law: Litigant Failing To Show She Was A Putative Domestic Partner Was Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Award
Marriage of Aviles Opinion Supported The Result. Marriage of Chevallier & Rodriguez, Case No. H052644 et al. (6th Dist. May 15, 2026) (unpublished) determined a…
Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Attorney’s Fees Award In Favor Of Non-Signatory, Alter Ego Targets Was Reversed And Remanded
On Remand, Only Contract Claim Work Could be Awarded, Not On Non-Contract Claims—Lower Court Vested With Discretion To Allocate On Remand. McCain v. Edwards, Case…
Discovery, Sanctions: Although Spoliation Issues Sanction Order Was Reversed, $16,000 Discovery Monetary Sanctions Were Proper Based On Motion Compelling Further Discovery Responses
Although Spoliation and Motion To Compel Issues Were Inextricably Intertwined, Motion To Compel Ruling Supported The Sanctions Award Where The Claimed Expenses Were Not Allocated…
Section 1717: Court Of Appeal Affirms Fee Award, Confirming That A Notice Of Motion For An Attorney’s Fee Request Does Not Have To Specifically Recite The Contract Which Was A Predicate For The Fee Motion
General Reference To The Parties’ Contract Sufficed. Yellow Dog Holdings, LLC v. Regions Bank, Case No. G064613 (4th Dist., Div. 3) (May 12, 2026) (unpublished),…
Allocation, Construction: Where Contractor Did Not Prevail On Contractual Provisions But Did Prevail On Prompt Payment Statutes, Lower Court’s Decision To Award Only A Quarter Of Requested Fees Was No Abuse Of Discretion
Goes To Show You That Discretionary Calls On Allocation Are Oft Times Affirmed On Appeal. K.G. Mullen, Inc. v. Kirakosian, Case No. B322602 (2d Dist.,…
Services
About Cal Attorneys Fees
Cal Attorneys Fees is a trusted legal research platform designed for California lawyers to efficiently review case law and access concise abstracts relevant to their ongoing matters. With over 10,000 cited cases and articles, it serves as a comprehensive repository for informed, strategic advocacy.
Contact Us
Have questions or need support? Reach out to the Cal Attorneys Fees team for assistance with case law access, article submissions, or account inquiries — we’re here to help California lawyers work smarter and faster.
-
Sanctions: Total Sanctions Of $6,000 Under CCP § 128.7, $5,000 To The Primary Defendant And $1,000 To The Lower Court, Was No Abuse Of Discretion Given Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Being Unable To Explain Why They Opposed A Stay Motion And Given Delegation To A Contract Attorney Who Cited To Non-Existent Cases, Hallucinations, And Citations Which Did Not Exist In Cases Relied On In The Stay Opposition
Attorneys’ Safe Harbor/Technical § 128.7 Arguments Were Forfeited Because They Were Not Raised Before The Lower Court—Not To Mention Attorneys Could Have Withdrawn Their Stay Opposition. Bad facts generally lead to losing appeals, and possibly more repercussions. Here, both the lower and appellate courts found that lead attorneys in two overlapping class actions had incredulous…
-
In The News: California Judicial Council Releases Court Statistics For 2015-16 Through 2024-25, As Well As For 2024-2025
The Reports Shows Statistics For CA Supreme Court Review Grants, DCA Publication Rates, DCA Disposition Rates, and Superior Court Disposition Rates. On the California Supreme Court website under “Judicial Council,” one can find the Judicial Council of California’s court statistics report for 2015-16 through 2024-25, which has a wealth of information. One may consult…
-
Class Actions, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: $2.274 Million Fee Award To Class Counsel, Where The Case Settled For $575,000, Was No Abuse Of Discretion
Plaintiffs Had Asked For About $7.465 Million Inclusive Of A 2.0 Positive Multiplier, With The Appellate Court Rebuffing That Any Further Reduction Was Justified. Defendant reached a settlement with plaintiffs in a class action case in Davis v. AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Case No. B348322 (2d Dist., Div. 4 June 1, 2026) (unpublished) for $575,000, although…
-
Discovery: Discovery Sanctions Against Employee, With Respect To Two Sets Of Third-Party Subpoenas, Are Affirmed On Appeal
$12,500 Was The Sanctions Tab Against A Third-Party Law Firm; $11,517.50 Was The Sanctions Award Against Another Third Party. We have related sanctions awards to third parties for subpoenas issued by an employee in both Crider v. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Case No. B342274 (2d Dist., Div. 8 May 29, 2026) (unpublished) and Crider…
-
Section 1717: $89,950 Postjudgment Fee Award Under Civil Code Section 1717 Is Affirmed On Appeal
Nothing Showed The Jury Earlier Had Awarded Fees As Damages, With The Prevailing Party’s Section 1717 Fee Request Being Incident To Prevailing Party’s Principal Cause Of Action. In 2540 Main Street Plaza, LLC v. Jiu-Jitsu Corp., Case No. G065859 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 27, 2026) (unpublished), landlord prevailed against tenants in a commercial lease…
-
Family Law: Disparity In Financial Conditions Justified An Award Of Family Code Section 2030 Fees To Ex-Husband Of $371,438.55
Ex-Wife Paid Nearly Double The Amount Of Fees To Her Attorney And She Would Get Trust Loans To Pay Ex-Husband, Justifying The Family Court Award. In the area of Family Code section 2030, the end goal is to level the “playing field” for family court litigants. The next case, Marriage of Khym & Miner, Case…