January 2014

Homeowner Associations: HOA Must Accept Partial Payment To Cure Delinquent Assessments Used For Judicial Foreclosure Of Delinquent Assessment Liens, With No Ability To Apply To Other Charges Like Attorney’s Fees And Costs

Cases: Homeowner Associations

  This One May Have Interesting Repercussions In HOA Lien Enforcement Actions.      Huntington Cont’l Town House Assn. v. JM Trust, 2014 Cal.App. LEXIS 41 (Orange County Superior Court Appellate Division) (Jan. 13, 2014) (published) is an interesting decision in the HOA assessment lien enforcement area. In essence, the superior court appellate division decided that […]

Cases Under Review/Deadlines: Unresolved Contractual Fee Motion Does Not Extend The Time To Appeal An Earlier Merits-Based Final Decision At Federal Court Level

Cases: Cases Under Review, Cases: Deadlines

  U.S. Supreme Court So Decides, Finding Rule for Statutorily-Based Fee Motions Applied to Contractually-Based Fee Motions Also.      On January 15, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Ray Haluch Gravel Co. v. Cent. Pension Fund of Int’l Union of Operating Eng’rs, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 646 (U.S. Jan. 15, 2014). Earlier, this

Private Attorney General: Winning Plaintiffs Did Not Meet Burden Of Showing Financial Burden Of Private Enforcement Made Fees Appropriate

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

In First Impression Issue, Decides that Immediate, Direct Financial Interest Not Required, With Potential Impact on Competition in a Mall Project Enough.      The Fifth District in LandValue 77, LLC v. Bd. of Trustees of Calif. State Univ., Case No. F063653 (5th Dist. Jan. 14, 2014) (unpublished) affirmed a lower court’s determination that Plaintiffs had

PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATUTE: WHERE DISTRICT FOUND TO BE PROPOSITION 218 COMPLIANT, PLAINTIFFS FOUND NOT ENTITLED TO CCP § 1021.5 FEES WHEN CERTAIN FEES VOLUNTARILY REMOVED BEFORE COMPLAINT FILED

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

No Substantial Benefit Conferred on Public, Reviewing Court Determines.      In Morgan v. Imperial Irrig. Dist., Case Nos. D060146/D061087 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 17, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiffs lost a contention that the Imperial Irrigation District did not comply with Proposition 218 in its passage of new water rates. District won, but the lower court

SLAPP: Fourth District, Division One Decides Lower Trial Court Must Determine If Defendant Would Have Prevailed On The Merits Under SLAPP Statute Where Plaintiff Voluntarily Dismisses for Purposes of SLAPP Fee Recovery

Cases: SLAPP

  4/1 DCA Notes Split in Opinion; We Predict This One May Be Accepted For Review.      Tourgeman v. Nelson v. Kennard, Case No. D063473 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 16, 2004) (published) dealt with a SLAPP fee recovery issue which has engendered a split in intermediate appellate thinking, which may (as best as we

Civil Rights FEHA/Family Law/Special Agricultural Fee Shifting Statute/Trespass Dominate Unpublished Decisions For January 15, 2014

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Family Law, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Trespass

  Civil Rights FEHA: Chiang v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B238948 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 15, 2014) (Unpublished).      County won summary judgment but appealed the lower court’s refusal to award it requested attorney’s fees of $324,098.80 as the prevailing party. The appellate court affirmed the conclusion that fees are not guided

Costs/SLAPP: Plaintiffs Ultimately Losing Against Defendants Did Not Defeat Defense Argument That Defendants Were Routine Costs “Prevailing Parties” Even Though Plaintiffs Won Fees/Costs On Prior Anti-SLAPP Motion

Cases: Costs, Cases: SLAPP

  No Real Case Law on the Precise Issue, But Result is Logical to Appellate Court.      Personalized Workout of La Jolla, Inc. v. Ravet, Case No. D061647 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 14, 2014) (unpublished) dealt with an interesting issue—whether plaintiffs winning fees/costs in a prior SLAPP proceeding were the parties with a “net

Civil Rights/Multiplier: $680,520 Fee Award Under FEHA Affirmed On Appeal Even Though Winning Civil Rights Plaintiff Only Won $150,000 In Damages

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Multipliers

  No Statement of Decision Required, and Not Requested—No Fee Award Error.      This one has quite a lot of permutations for everyone to consider. On the merits, in a first impression case, the appellate held that a defective special verdict is reviewed under a harmless error analysis. However, it also has some nice themes

Scroll to Top