September 2024

In The News: Governor Newsom Signs Into Law New Statute Preventing Political Candidates From Defending Themselves From Felony Public Or Election Fraud Charges, Having To Return The Money If They Are Convicted

In The News

Statute Was Enacted Per AB 2803, Directed At Campaign Funds Used To Pay Defense Attorney’s Fees.                Last Wednesday, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 2803, which amended Government Code sections 89513 and 89514 to require a political candidate, if convicted, to reimburse campaign funds used to pay attorney’s fees for certain felony public and […]

Private Attorney General: Where Litigants Dismissed Claims Against Each Other, After Denial Of A Class Certification Motion, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Receiving No Judicial Relief Or $14 Million Class Action Objective Not Entitled To CCP § 1021.5 Fees

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Published Decision Only Decided Plaintiff Had To Be Registered With State Bar, But It Did Not Adjudicate A Key Unclean Hands Defense.                In LegalMatch.com v. Jackson, Case No. A169115 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Sept. 26, 2024) (unpublished), defendant defended a suit by plaintiff LegalMatch.com after defendant did not pay subscription fees for connecting clients

Quantum Meruit, Retainer Agreements: $100,000 True Retainer Was Not That Based On Additional Qualifying, But Law Firm Was Entitled To Quantum Meruit Fees Minus An Offset For The $100,000 Retainer

Cases: Quantum Meruit, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Case Has A Very Scholarly Discussion Of Requirements For True Retainers.                Boyadzhyan v. Geragos & Geragos, APC, Case No. B324420 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 26, 2024) (unpublished) is an interesting case and, for practitioners and ethics experts, has an excellent discussion on the differences between a true retainer, fixed fee, or retainer with

Arbitration: Appellate Court Reverses Lower Court’s Denial Of Motion To Compel Arbitration Where Requesting Designer/Materialman Paid Arbitration Fees

Cases: Arbitration

Designer Did Not Have To Meet Payment Obligations By Contractor, So There Was No Waiver Or Forfeiture.                Facts many times make the difference in the resolution of a dispute.  And that conclusion rang true in Mooradian v. Ingjaldsdottir, Case No. B331561 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 26, 2024) (unpublished).                There, homeowners, designer, materialman,

Section 1717: Defendant Obtaining Reversal Of Interference Claim Because It Was Based Entirely On Contract Was Properly Awarded Section 1717 Fees

Cases: Section 1717

After The Successful Appeal, Defendant Awarded $604,700 In Fees.                In the Civil Code section 1717 area, only contract-based claims are allowable for recovery purposes, with tort claims usually not qualifying.  However, that “usually” caveat has an important section:  where a tort is based on a duty created solely by a contract, enforcement of that

Arbitration, Family Law: MFAA Fee Process Is Not Required For Fees To Be Awarded To Attorney Representing Minor In A Custody Dispute

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Family Law

Family Code Section 3153 And CRC 5.241 Supported This Conclusion.                In Marriage of Thompson, Case No. B332150 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 24, 2024) (unpublished), ex-spouses were embroiled in a “high conflict” custody dispute over their minor child, with the family court appointing a family law attorney to represent the minor child and with

Arbitration: Employer Did Not Blow 30-Day Payment Window Under CCP § 1281.98 Because Employee Did Not Properly Serve The Arbitration Demand, Allowing For Payment Later

Cases: Arbitration

Denial Of Motion To Compel Arbitration Is Reversed And Matter Ordered To Arbitration.                CCP § 1281.98 is the 30-day window for an employer to pay arbitration expenses under penalty of going to court rather than arbitration under the contractual arbitration clause with employee.  This statute has produced much litigation; and, as we have indicated

Ethics, Liens For Attorney Fees: Attorney’s Lien Had Superiority Over Surety’s Later Assignment Of Claims, Gaining Almost $1.39 Million From Settlement Proceeds

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees

Lower Court Did Not Err In Adjudicating Lien Claim In The Underlying Action Because The Parties Stipulated To The Procedure.                Plaintiff’s attorney in USS Cal Builders, Inc. v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Dist., Case No. A168102 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 20, 2024) (unpublished) had a lien on settlement proceeds which was

Indemnity: Plaintiff Winning Its Contract Action Properly Denied Fee Recovery Because The Purported Fee Clause Was Actually A Third-Party Indemnity Clause Not Allowing For Such Recovery In A Direct Action Between The Contracting Parties

Cases: Indemnity

1/1 DCA Found Alki Opinion To Be Persuasive.                Clauses providing for indemnification against third party claims are frequently determined not to give rise to attorney’s fees recovery in an action involving the two contracting parties.  In determining if an indemnity versus a true fees clause is involved, courts not only look at the contractual

Costs: Fifth District Agrees That Unity Of Interest Principle Was Repealed In The Routine Costs Area

Cases: Costs

It Endorsed The Reasoning In The Charton Opinion.                In Mosley v. Pacifica Bakersfield, L.P., Case No. F084699 (5th Dist. Sept. 20, 2024) (unpublished), a co-defendant dismissed right before trial was awarded a little over $28,000 in routine costs against plaintiff, who won sizable damages.  The Fifth District affirmed, deciding that (1) CCP § 1032(a)(4)

Scroll to Top