Fast Track is Working, Jury Trials are Few for 2007-2008 FY, and Class Actions Have Increased Between 2000-2006. The “2009 Court Statistics Report” is available for reading from the Judicial Council of California, containing interesting statistics for all levels of the California judiciary for the fiscal year 2007-2008 time frame. It is available […]
Fourth District, Division 3 Finds That Fee Recordkeeping and Trust Litigation Expenses Must Be Scrutinzed Closely to Determine if Fees Were Reasonable and Appropriate From a Trust Benefitting Perspective. Donahue v. Donahue, Case Nos. G040628/G041503 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 24, 2010) (certified for publication), is sure to be a widely cited opinion when
Decision Revisits State of E-Discovery Six Years After Zubulake. At both the federal and state levels of litigation, e-discovery is an expensive process fraught with onerous obligations by the responding litigants and their attorneys. Obviously, failure to preserve, collect and store documents can harm the integrity of the judicial process. As a result, the
First District, Division 5 Reverses Fee Award Based on Woodland Park Decision. In our February 2, 2010 post on Woodland Park Management, LLC v. City of East Palo Alto Rent Stabilization Bd., 181 Cal.App.4th 915 (2010), we reviewed a decision reversing a fee award against the City of East Palo Alto under the Rent
Fourth District, Division 3 Finds Nothing Wrong With “Joint and Several” Judgment. Plaintiff sold its property and assigned its rights under a lease with a particular tenant to another company becoming a co-plaintiff in an unlawful detainer action eventually won by defendant tenant. There was a fees clause, with the lower court awarding over
Second District, Division 4 Agrees that Attorney Representing His Own Interests Cannot Recoup SLAPP Fees. Attorneys representing themselves in successful anti-SLAPP motions are not entitled to recover attorney’s fees because there are no attorney-client relationships that lead to the attorney paying or becoming liable to pay in consideration for the legal representation. (Taheri Law
Fourth District, Division 3 Found Fee Recovery Justified Even Though Satisfaction Demand Not Delivered Per Statute. Code of Civil Procedure section 724.050 provides the exclusive procedure for compelling an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment, requiring the party demanding the acknowledgment to deliver its demand with certain warnings either personally or by U.S. mail. A
Plaintiff Only Won $55,000 Jury Verdict Plus $18,000 in Costs. Although awards to winning plaintiffs under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act are encouraged, they must be reasonable in amount. Otherwise, the trial court has broad discretion to deny them in entirety or substantially chop them down from their higher requests. The next
High Court Recently Hears Arguments in Astrue v. Ratliff. In our October 1, 2009 post, we reported that the U.S. Supreme Court had accepted review of Astrue v. Ratliff, an Eighth Circuit decision. The issue for consideration was whether Social Security disability fee awards belong to clients, rather than their attorneys, so as to
Another Good Appellate Reminder from the Second District, Division 6. Husband wanted to challenge a $35,000 attorney’s fees award under Family Code section 2030 to wife on appeal. However, he failed to provide any supporting argument or citation to authority in his opening brief. He waited until the reply brief to do so. Too
