Explore thousands of curated case law summaries, expert analyses, and legal insights tailored for California attorneys. Our Articles page is your gateway to over 10,000 cited cases and abstracts — organized for fast reference and strategic research.
-
Reasonableness Of Fees: $256,087 Fee Award To Plaintiffs Affirmed In Memorandum Opinion
Appellant Failed To Observe Many Appellate Rules Of Practice, Such That Affirmance Was In Order. Sarkany v. West, Case No. A174750 (1st Dist., Div. 1 June 25, 2026) (unpublished) was a situation where plaintiffs won summary judgment in a fraudulent transfer action to preserve a substantial wrongful eviction judgment against the other side. The lower…
-
Appealability: In A Civil Online Harassment Proceeding, Losing Appellant’s Failure To Separately Appeal The Adverse Fee Award Means The Appellate Court Lacked Jurisdiction To Consider Arguments Against It
A Lesson We Have Posted On Many Times Before—Separately Appeal, Protectively. In Boisot v. Logan, Case No. D085234 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 25, 2026) (unpublished), parties filed dueling requests for restraining orders against each other for online harassment. Respondent’s request was granted, but Appellant’s request was denied. Later, the lower court granted Respondent $32,541.40…
-
SLAPP: Prevailing Parties On ADA Defendant’s Cross-Complaint Against Plaintiff And Her Attorneys Were Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Of $13,000 For Winning A SLAPP Motion Against Cross-Complainant/ADA Defendant
Cross-Complainant’s Failure To Oppose the Fee Request Was Dispositive, With Trial Level Fee Award Affirmed And Remand To Consider Request For Appellate Fees. Anti-SLAPP motions which are granted give the winning defendants/cross-defendants the ability to seek reasonable, mandatory fees. In Thottam v. Edgar, Case No. B351320 (2d Dist., Div. 4 June 24, 2026) (unpublished), a…
-
Arbitration: Finding No Basis For Vacatur, Appellate Court Affirms $12 Million-Plus Arbitration Award In Employment Case
. . . Inclusive Of A Total Of $957,640.27 In Fees And Costs Award Components. Arbitration awards, even if wrong on the merits, are difficult to overturn based on the latitude afforded arbitrators in the absent of an arbitration agreement requiring more stringent protocols. Shifrin v. Strata Equity Global, Inc., Case No. D085526 (4th Dist.,…
-
POOF!, Sanctions: Lower Court’s Dismissal Of Case For Late Filing Of Joint Pretrial Documents Under LASC Local Rule Reversed As Disproportionate
$84,600 In Attorney’s Fees Went POOF! With The Merits Reversal. In Meinhardt v. Sunny Acre LLC,Case No. B343467 (2d Dist., Div. 5 June 23, 2026) (unpublished), the 2/5 DCA reversed a lower court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ case and imposition of an $84,600 attorney’s fees award where plaintiffs tardily filed joint pretrial disclosures the day before…
-
Liens For Attorney Fees, Retainer Agreements: Plaintiff’s Failure To Obtain A Valid Fee Division Agreement With Other Law Firm Members, After She Left, Means That The Other Attorneys Faced No Fee Exposure For Disbursing Recovery Funds
The Contractual Attorney’s Lien Was Between Plaintiff And The Client, So No Fiduciary Duty Was Owed By The Other Firm Members To Plaintiffs. In Palmieri v. Foondos, Case No. C100383 (3d Dist. June 22, 2026) (unpublished), a fight developed between plaintiff and other members of a law firm she left with respect to recovery of…
-
Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Civil Harassment Petition Dismissed Without Prejudice Did Trigger Attorney’s Fees Under CCP § 527.6
$12,500 In Attorney’s Fees Was The Result. In Loew v. Robinson, Case No. B346996 (2d Dist., Div. 6 June 22, 2026) (unpublished), a litigant dismissing a civil harassment restraining order, after obtaining a liminal temporary restraining order, was assessed $12,500 in attorney’s fees under CCP § 527.6 under a discretionary fee-shifting statute as against the…
-
Allocation, Costs, Homeowner Associations, Prevailing Party On Appeal: HOA Was The Prevailing Party For Appellate Costs And Fees
. . . But Fees Had To Be Allocated To Only Successful Claims Because Opponent Prevailed On Some Issues. The Colony at Cal. Oaks HOA v. Majestic Asset Mgt., LLC, Case No. D083140 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 18, 2026) (unpublished) was an HOA versus certain member dispute involving a golf course. The case, on…
-
Appealability, SLAPP: 2/7 DCA Again Holds That Order Granting Prevailing Party’s Motion For SLAPP Fees Is Not Appealable
This Follows Its Earlier Conclusion In The Published Clapkin Case. On March 17, 2026, we posted on Clapkin v. Levin, 119 Cal.App.5th 222 (2026), a 2/7 DCA opinion where the appellate court determined that an order denying a SLAPP fee motion is not appealable. The same Division followed that reasoning in Moussazadeh v. Integrative Surgical…