Initial Denial That Association Rules Were Violated, Conceded Later At Trial, Justified The Award. In Verotel Merchant Services B.V. v. Rizal Commercial Bank, Case Nos. B276120/B281869 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 13, 2021) (unpublished), some plaintiffs won $1.526 million in compensatory damages and $7.5 million in punitive damages against defendants. During the case, the […]
No Authority Provided To Show A Litigant Prevailed On Opposing A Fee Motion Where That Litigant Did Not Prevail On The Merits. Allen v. MacIntosh, Case No. E073408 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 13, 2021) (unpublished) involved a trespass dispute on land which had a portion dedicated for use as a pet cemetery. In
Buyer Failed To Meet Its Burden Of Rebutting Seller’s Showing Of Entitlement And Reasonableness Of Fees With Supporting Rebuttal Evidence. In Kim v. PCP-Sundance, Case Nos. D076510/D076799 (4th Dist., Div. 1 January 11, 2021) (unpublished), buyer of a mobile home park sued sellers for $1,754,428.50 for breach of the parties’ Special Indemnity Agreement (SIA)
Self-Represented Attorney Husband Incurred No Fees To Which The Section 271 Sanctions Must Be Tethered. Family Code § 271, subdivision (a), provides that “the court may base an award of attorney’s fees and costs on the extent to which the conduct of each party or attorney furthers or frustrates the policy of the law
Kentucky Supreme Court So Holds In July 2020 Published Opinion. Malicious prosecution, in California and most jurisdictions, has an improper purpose element with respect to filing or prosecuting a claim—with Kentucky labeling malicious prosecution as a wrongful use of civil proceedings claim. The Kentucky Supreme Court, in Seiller Waterman, LLC, et al. v. RLB
Trial Court’s Determination That Plaintiff City Was The Prevailing Party Was Proper Under Catalyst Theory, City’s Arrangement With Outside Counsel Did Not Violate Defendant’s Due Process Rights, And Fee Award Of $60,798.94 To City Was Not Meant To Penalize Defendant For Defending Property Rights. We discussed City of Norco v. Mugar, Case No. E072858
The Fees Clause In The Parties’ Contract Covered Only Contract Claims And Plaintiff’s Tort Claim Was Not Inextricably Intertwined With Its Dismissed Contract Claim. In WindAirWest v. Castle & Cooke, Case Nos. B295513 and B299043 (2d Dist., Div. 3 January 8, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiff, an operator of a private jet charter company, entered into
In Separate Merits Appeal, Appeal Was Cognizable Although Possession Returned To Landlords During Appeal Because Review Would Determine Landlord Liability For Fees/Costs. In Lee v. Kotyluk, Case No. G058631 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 7, 2021) (published), landlords sought to evict a commercial tenant for selling marijuana without a license. The lower court found
Fees To Three Firms Representing Trustee In Multiple Venues Was Just Fine In This Context. A beneficiary under a trust, which engaged in a long-standing dispute against trustee in multiple venues (California superior court, California appellate court, U.S. bankruptcy court, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals), was not happy when well-documented fees incurred
Reason For The Dismissal Was Plaintiffs’ Failure To Adequate Raise Or Brief The Issue. In New Livable California v. Assn of Bay Area Governments, Case No. A159235 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 18, 2020 December 18, 2020, published on Jan. 6, 2021), plaintiffs lost a Brown Act writ of mandate petition on a demurrer,
