Second District, Division 1 So Holds, After Split in Opinion By Two Unpublished Cases. In our June 19, 2008 post, we discussed Foster v. Warner, 2008 WL 2445106 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008), which held that the anti-SLAPP mandatory fee shifting provision (CCP § 425.16(c)(1), mandatory as to a prevailing defendant) does not authorize an […]
$64,000 Attorney’s Fees Sustained on Appeal By Second District, Division 8. Plaintiff, in a Lemon Law car case, actually won $37,508.84 for breach of implied warranty and $560 for breach of express warranty as against Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MB). Because the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act has a mandatory fee shifting provision for winning car
Defendant Wives Found Unified in Interest With Settling Defendant Husbands; Plaintiff’s Voluntary Dismissal of Wives Was Dispositive. You almost could tell what might happen in the next case. The case involved acrimonious litigation between sellers and buyers for mold and dry rot in a residential property. The parties were plaintiffs husband/wife, defendants husbands, and
Fourth District, Division 3 Puts Decision “In the Books.” In our September 30, 2010 post, we discussed Hyduke’s Valley Motors v. Lobel Financial Corp., Case No. G042816 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 29, 2010), which found no Civil Code section fee recovery was allowable to a plaintiff used car dealer because it did not
Prior Appellate Court Conclusion Was Binding On Fee Entitlement. Steele v. Spina, Case No. A127959 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 21, 2010) (unpublished) is a good illustration of where the “law of the case” doctrine will prevent a second bite challenge to a fee award. A prior appellate court opinion held that the trial
Ninth Circuit Reverses District Court’s Denial of Fees to Settling Plaintiff. In La Asociacion de Trabajadores de Lake Forest v. National Day Laborer Organizing Network, Case No. 08-56564 (9th Cir. Oct. 22, 2010) (for publication), plaintiff reached a settlement agreement with defendants over the enforcement of restrictions on day laborers soliciting work on public
First District, Division 2 So Rules in Lengthy Unpublished Decision. Soderling v. Office of the California Attorney General, Case Nos. A124196/A124931 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 22, 2010) (unpublished) concerned an appeal by a doctor suing to overturn the trial court’s partial grant of an anti-SLAPP motion against the California Attorney General (AG) as
Court Rules in 5 –2 Decision that 1975 Statutory Reforms to Class Actions in NY Allow Fees Only to Class Representative. This next one is a bit off our beat, since it involves NY law, but we think it will be of interest to class action attorneys. New York’s highest court has ruled, in
As we read more and more cases on fee awards, we are struck about how both trial and appellate courts really like litigants to be reasonable and do not condone litigation that goes on and on in a fashion derided by Charles Dickens some time ago. These next two cases illustrate how the protracted
Arbitrator’s Failure to File Certificate Approving Out of State Attorney Until After Filing of the Favorable Arbitration Award Was Deemed Harmless Error. For those practitioners that are involved in arbitrations (and most litigators are in this day and age), here is an interesting case about approval of out of state attorneys and their
