Author name: Marc Alexander

Costs, Private Attorney General, Reasonableness Of Fees: Petitioners, In Long-Standing San Francisco Bicycle Plan CEQA Challenges, Who Achieved Limited Success, Had Costs Properly Stricken And Recovered 50% Less Than Requested Once The Lodestar Was Reduc

Cases: Costs, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Bottom Line In This Case, Limited Success Will Impact Cost and Fee Recovery, Even In Public Interest Cases.             We have seen that costs and attorney’s fees in many public interest cases, including those under the private attorney general statute, can be quite large.  However, one should keep in mind that the cost and fee […]

SLAPP, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Founding Partner Of Software Company Did Get Hit With Some Fee/Costs Exposure From Shareholder Derivative Case And Malicious Prosecution Case Which Was SLAPPed

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Not Huge Amounts, But Some Challenges Were Untimely And Some Were Not Meritorious.             To end the year, we post on Storix, Inc. v. Johnson, Case Nos. D075308/D077096 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 31, 2020) (unpublished), which was a very contested dispute between software company Storix and founder Mr. Johnson, which dragged in various directors

Ethics, Quantum Meruit: Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Award Of Zero Fees To Contingency Attorneys Obtaining $25 Million Award For Clients Based On Failure To Substantiate Fees And On Certain Fiduciary Breaches To Client

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Quantum Meruit

However, Clients Had To Reimburse Certain Hard Costs To Attorneys.             Although we generally do not post on out-of-state cases, Vandenberg v. RQM, LLC, No. 10 L 003188, 2020 Ill. App. (1st) 190544 (Ill. App. June 26, 2020) is a sobering reminder of what contingency attorneys must do to obtain substantial fees where a settlement

Year In Review – 2020

Year in Review

Year End Wrap-Up:  Mike, Marc, and Shanna’s Top 30 Decisions in 2020 Sculpture "The Decisions" at the Robert T. Matsui U.S. Courthouse, Sacramento, California.  Carol M. Highsmith, photographer.  October 2009.  Library of Congress. Part 2 of 2—Specific Fee Shifting Statute, Employment, Code of Civil Procedure Section 998, Civil Code Section 1717, and Sanctions Issues Dominated.

Sanctions: Trial Judge’s Failure To Expressly Specify The Sanctionable Conduct Required A Remand And Do-Over

Cases: Sanctions

Appellate Court Found Basis Existed For Sanctions, But Required Greater Clarity Especially Given That Bar Discipline Could Be At Issue.             An attorney in American Express Bank FSB v. Singh (Abdeljawad), Case No. E074042 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Dec. 30, 2020) (unpublished) violated a court order to personally appear at a Fall 2019 hearing to

Civil Rights: $3,164,955.61 Fee Award Under The California Voting Rights Act Affirmed Where Plaintiffs Successfully Challenged City Of Santa Clara’s At-Large City Council Elections

Cases: Civil Rights

Plaintiffs Can Also Seek Compensation For Postjudgment Fee Work Before The Superior Court After Remittitur Issuance.             The California Voting Rights Act, Elections Code section 14030, has a pro-plaintiff, private attorney general-type of fee shifting provision, which states: “ . . . the court shall allow the prevailing plaintiff party, other than the state or

Employment: Reversal Of Shoulder Injury Portion Of Jury Verdict Required A Retrial And Reversal Of $503,273.50 FEHA Fee Recovery Award Until Retrial/Settlement Is Achieved

Cases: Employment

Case Is Must Reading On Reasonable Accommodation/Interactive Process FEHA Claims.             FEHA plaintiff in Shirvanyan v. L.A. Community College Dist., Case Nos. B296593/B297419 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 30, 2020 unpublished; Dec. 29, 2020 published) won a $2,899,670 economic/emotional distress damages award based on claims that District failed to make reasonable accommodations and engage in

Default Judgments: Where A Defendant Contests A Default Judgment, Successful Post-Judgment Efforts To Defeat Motion To Vacate Give Rise To Recoverable Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Default Judgments

However, No Pre-Judgment Fees Allowed Because Plaintiff Did Not Include A Request For Fees At The Time The Default Judgment Was Entered.             In Vincent v. Sonkey, Case No. B293251 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Dec. 29, 2020) (published), plaintiff obtained a default judgment against defendants (one of whom was alleged to be an alter ego

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff Settling For $150,000 In FEHA/Residential Inhabitability Case For Costs Of Defense To Try The Matter, Was Properly Denied Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Prevailing Party

Plaintiff’s Request For $819,171.75 In Fees Was Inflated, With $150,000 Settlement Amount Being Much Lower Than The Damages Being Sought, Forget Demands In Mediation.             With 2020 drawing to a close, we can say there have been a surge in decisions on who is a prevailing party under Civil Code section 1717 where the results

Prevailing Party: Determination That No Side Prevailed Under Contentious Parking Easement Dispute Was Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Prevailing Party

Where One Side Wanted Exclusive Parking Easement And Other Side Wanted Termination Of Easement/Tort Damages, Trial Court’s Decision To Share Parking Was A True “Lose-Lose” Case For Everyone.             One of our leading cases, Hsu v. Abbara, 9 Cal.4th 863 (1995), is must reading and the blueprint for the decision to affirm a trial court’s

Scroll to Top