Recent Articles
Homeowner Associations, POOF!: In A Case Involving Two Homeowners, 4/1 DCA’s Majority Opinion Struck An Attorney’s Fees Award Completely Because It Was Premature And Plaintiff Was Not The Prevailing Party
Dissent Disagreed, Wanting To Remand The Matter For Determining A Reasonable Fee Award–$138,875 In Fees Went POOF! Based On The Majority Opinion. In an interesting…
Fee Clause Interpretation, Prevailing Party: Where Defendant Minimally Prevailed On A Declaratory Relief Claim But County Avoided $6 Million Exposure On A Negligent Misrepresentation Count, County Was Entitled To Over $800,000 In Attorney’s Fees And A Little Under $24,000 In Costs Under A Contractual Fee Clause
Under A Broad Contractual Fees Clause, The Lower Court Can Determine The Prevailing Party—Much To The Chagrin Of A Losing Party. We have posted for…
Costs: Where Party Moving To Tax Appellate Costs Demonstrated That Party Paid Some Expenses, The Burden Shifted To The Costs-Claiming Party To Provide Receipts
The Motion To Tax Costs Did Shift The Burden Back To The Costs Claimant—Not Met. In Deen v. Kreditor, Case No. G064426 (4th Dist., Div….
Retainer Agreements: Plaintiff Disputing Allocation To Her As Client And To Her Attorneys Lost The Fight Because The Retainer Agreement Had A Provision Stating That No Contingency Arrangements Applied To Settlements Where Individual Recovery And Fee Recovery To Counsel Were Separately Negotiated
Plaintiff Herself Was A Sophisticated Litigant, With The Lower And Appellate Courts Finding The Retainer Agreement Was Unambiguous In The Proper Allocation. Brinkman v. Jane…
Arbitration, Section 1717: Where Arbitration Respondent Won A Dismissal Of An Arbitration Award Based On Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Respondent Was Not Entitled To Fees But Was Entitled To Routine Costs
Fee Issues Depended On Further Actions. In O’Leary v. Jones III, Case No. D085327 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 24, 2026) (published), the Court…
Costs, Requests For Admission, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: In A Complex Water Diversion/Trespass Case, 2/7 DCA Affirms Costs Award To Defendant City, Affirms Denial Of Supplemental Fees And Costs To City Under CCP §§ 1038 & 2033.420, And Reverses Costs Award To Defendant Water Committee Based On Reversing A Judgment In Its Favor
Acting Presiding Justice Segal Penned The 3-0 Opinion On Various Merits, Costs, And Fee Issues In A 74-Page Opinion. In Beecham v. City of Azusa,…
Probate, Sanctions: CCP § 128.7(b)(1) Sanctions Affirmed Against A Probate Litigant Filing A New Contesting Petition For An Improper Purpose
CCP § 128.7(b)(2) Represented Litigant Exception Did Not Apply To (b)(1) Sanctions, Resulting In An Upholding Of A $25,013 Sanctions Award Against Losing Trustee. In…
Requests for Admission, Sanctions: 1/3 DCA Remands Trial Court’s Denial Of RFA Costs-Of-Proof Sanctions As An Abuse Of Discretion
Estate of Alders, Case No. A171324 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 23, 2026) (unpublished) examines the diligence required from both litigants and superior courts to…
Arbitration, Celebrities: In A 2-1 Split Opinion, The 2/7 DCA Holds That A Law Firm Prevailing In A MFAA Arbitration Was Not The Prevailing Party For Purposes Of Fees/Costs In That Proceeding Because It Waived The Argument In Front Of A CAA Arbitrator And The Superior Court Could Discretionarily Deny Fees Based On The Arbitrator Determining There Was No Prevailing Party In Arbitration Award Confirmation Proceedings
Dissenting Justice Saw Things Differently: Superior Court Had To Independently Determine MFAA Award Issue Or Remand To The Arbitrator To Decide. Allan Law Group, P.C….
Allocation, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Lower Court Could Make Allocation Of Fees Between Contract/Tort Claims, But It Erred In Not Allowing Opposing Party To Review/Contest A Supplemental Declaration From The Fee Claimant To Support The Final Fee Award
The Matter Is Remanded To Look At A Restudy Of The Supplemental Declaration. Due process is alive and well in the attorney’s fees area, as…
Private Attorney General: $165,072.50 Attorney’s Fees Award On CEQA Win To Prevailing Litigant Is Affirmed On Appeal
Housing Accountability Act Standards Can Be Factored Into The Equation, With Trade Union Affiliations Not Showing It Made A Difference On The Financial Cost/Benefit Factor….
Sanctions: First District Court Of Appeal Publishes Opinion Informing In Pro Per Litigants That They Cannot Use And Are Subject For Sanctions When Relying On AI Hallucinations
This Case Builds On Cases Applicable To Attorneys, But Extends The Prohibition To In Pro Per Litigants. In Sheerer v. Panas, Case No. A171804 (1st…
Costs, Deadlines, POOF!: Although Plaintiff Won On The Merits, Substantial Fee Recovery and Routine Costs Recovery Were Reversed As A Matter Of Law
Fees Were Not Allowable Without A Fees Motion; Costs Were Not Allowable Because Failure To Use Judicial Council Worksheet Gave No Basis For A Conclusion…
Costs, Deadlines, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: CHRO Prevailing Party On Modification Request And Appeal Work On Certain Orders Was Entitled To The Lower Court’s Fee Recovery
However, Because A Harassment Renewal Order Was Reversed, Fees For Those Efforts Were Not Allowable As Well As Routine Cost Recovery Because No Memorandum Of…
Appealability, SLAPP: Order Denying or Granting A SLAPP Fees Motion Is Not Appealable
2/7 DCA Decides To Follow Its Prior Opinion in Doe v. Luster. In Clapkin v. Levin, Case No. B340606 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 16,…
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.
-
Homeowner Associations, POOF!: In A Case Involving Two Homeowners, 4/1 DCA’s Majority Opinion Struck An Attorney’s Fees Award Completely Because It Was Premature And Plaintiff Was Not The Prevailing Party
Dissent Disagreed, Wanting To Remand The Matter For Determining A Reasonable Fee Award–$138,875 In Fees Went POOF! Based On The Majority Opinion. In an interesting 2-1 decision, the 4/1 DCA in Senseman v. Mimi Real Properties, Case No. D084658 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 26, 2026) (unpublished) affirmed a merits determination but struck a $138,875…
-
Fee Clause Interpretation, Prevailing Party: Where Defendant Minimally Prevailed On A Declaratory Relief Claim But County Avoided $6 Million Exposure On A Negligent Misrepresentation Count, County Was Entitled To Over $800,000 In Attorney’s Fees And A Little Under $24,000 In Costs Under A Contractual Fee Clause
Under A Broad Contractual Fees Clause, The Lower Court Can Determine The Prevailing Party—Much To The Chagrin Of A Losing Party. We have posted for years as bloggers. We are not judges, nor pretend to be. But we can say certain themes prevail in many cases we have posted on: (1) broad contractual fee clauses…
-
Costs: Where Party Moving To Tax Appellate Costs Demonstrated That Party Paid Some Expenses, The Burden Shifted To The Costs-Claiming Party To Provide Receipts
The Motion To Tax Costs Did Shift The Burden Back To The Costs Claimant—Not Met. In Deen v. Kreditor, Case No. G064426 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 25, 2026) (unpublished), a prevailing party on a prior appeal filed a costs memorandum for appellate costs totaling $1,184.65. The losing side filed a motion to tax appellate…
-
Retainer Agreements: Plaintiff Disputing Allocation To Her As Client And To Her Attorneys Lost The Fight Because The Retainer Agreement Had A Provision Stating That No Contingency Arrangements Applied To Settlements Where Individual Recovery And Fee Recovery To Counsel Were Separately Negotiated
Plaintiff Herself Was A Sophisticated Litigant, With The Lower And Appellate Courts Finding The Retainer Agreement Was Unambiguous In The Proper Allocation. Brinkman v. Jane Doe, Case No. A173377 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 24, 2026) (unpublished) is a situation where plaintiff disputed what portion of a settlement negotiated with two different bank defendants was…
-
Arbitration, Section 1717: Where Arbitration Respondent Won A Dismissal Of An Arbitration Award Based On Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Respondent Was Not Entitled To Fees But Was Entitled To Routine Costs
Fee Issues Depended On Further Actions. In O’Leary v. Jones III, Case No. D085327 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 24, 2026) (published), the Court of Appeal confirmed a denial of attorney’s fees to an arbitration respondent, who was never joined in a court action before the matter was ordered to arbitration such that the…
-
Costs, Requests For Admission, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: In A Complex Water Diversion/Trespass Case, 2/7 DCA Affirms Costs Award To Defendant City, Affirms Denial Of Supplemental Fees And Costs To City Under CCP §§ 1038 & 2033.420, And Reverses Costs Award To Defendant Water Committee Based On Reversing A Judgment In Its Favor
Acting Presiding Justice Segal Penned The 3-0 Opinion On Various Merits, Costs, And Fee Issues In A 74-Page Opinion. In Beecham v. City of Azusa, Case No. B33843 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 23, 2026) (unpublished), deceased trustee, through a substituted personal presentative, sued two City entities (City), an irrigation company, and a water committee…