Author name: Marc Alexander

Family Law: Lower Court’s Failure To Specifically Make Explicit Findings Under Family Code Section 2030 As To Ex-Wife’s Needs-Based Request Necessitated A Remand

Cases: Family Law

Equivocal Reasoning That Wife “Might Prevail In A 2030 Argument, But Certainly Not Prevail Under A 271 Argument” Was Too Cryptic An Explanation.             In order to level the dissolution playing field where one spouse has a greater access to financial resources (so as to pay attorneys and forensic accountants), Family Code section 2030 allows […]

Requests For Admission: Plaintiff Boyfriend Winning Loan Dispute Against Girlfriend Properly Awarded $44,242.50 In Costs Of Proof Sanctions Where Boyfriend Won A $111,325 Recovery

Cases: Requests for Admission

However, Boyfriend Not Awarded Fees On Appeal Based On Failing To Identify A Fee Entitlement Basis.             As the famous comedian Jackie Mason once quipped, “Money is not the most important thing in the world.  Love is.  Fortunately, I love money.”  That quote well encapsulates the result in the next case we post on.            

Fee Clause Interpretation: $1,487,990.30 Attorney’s Fees Award Based On Settlement Agreement Contractual Fees Clause Affirmed In Favor Of Prevailing Mobile Home Plaintiffs

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Appellate Court Rejected Election Of Remedies Argument Where Plaintiffs Prevailed On Both Contract And Tort Claims With Overlapping, Yet Different, Facts.             Mobile home park/related property management defendants had reached an earlier settlement with two mobile home residents, with the settlement agreement having a contractual fees clause for a breach limited to contract claims.  Subsequently,

Private Attorney General: Intervenor In Reverse-PRA Action, Where Only Limited Disclosure Of Publicly Available Documents Was Ordered, Did Not Satisfy Separate Significant Benefit Prong Of CCP § 1021.5

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Public Interest And Significant Benefit Prongs Of Private Attorney General Statute Must Be Satisfied Independently.             In Burgess v. Coronado Unified School Dist., Case No. D076263 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 24, 2020) (published), a reverse action under the California Public Records Act (PRA) was filed by a news outlet employee to enjoin District from

Section 998: CalTrans’ Pretrial CCP § 998 Offer To Losing Motor Vehicle Plaintiff Based On Design Immunity Was Valid And Reasonable

Cases: Section 998

$24.516.05 In Expert Witness Fees Awarded By Lower Court Was No Abuse Of Discretion, Although The Dissent In A 2-1 Decision Would Have Reversed The Design Immunity Summary Judgment Ruling.             Menges v. Dept. of Transportation, Case Nos. G057643/G058148 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 24, 2020) (published) involved a plaintiff, through a guardian ad litem,

Equity: Economic Duress Doctrine Supports No Award Of Post-Judgment Collection Fees In Dissolution Action Involving, Yes, A $20,000 Marital Settlement Agreement Sum

Cases: Equity

Husband Was Forced To Pay Off Exorbitant Fee Judgment Lien Amounts, With Equity Coming To The Rescue!             We wish all of our readers Happy Holidays as we come to the close of an interesting year.             Although involving convoluted facts and procedural history, Marriage of White & Hunter, Case No. A157398 (1st Dist., Div.

SLAPP: 1/2 DCA, Although Acknowledging Slim Nature Of Defense SLAPP Motion, Sustained Not Awarding Fees To Plaintiff For A Claimed Frivolous SLAPP Motion

Cases: SLAPP

Matter Was Close, But Deference To Trial Judge Made The Difference.             In Guinnane Construction Co., Inc. v. Chess, Case No. A157781 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Dec. 22, 2020) (unpublished), plaintiff won a SLAPP motion and moved for fees based on the contention that the defense motion was frivolous.  The trial judge denied plaintiff’s fee

Lodestar, Multiplier, Reasonableness Of Fees: Prevailing FEHA Plaintiff Only Recovering $400,800 In Fees Out Of Requested $1,064,062.70 Did Not Recover Any More On Appeal

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Compensatory Award Was $575,000.             Plaintiff did prevail on some wrongful termination/FEHA claims to the tune of $575,000 in past noneconomic damages.  Plaintiff later moved to recoup $1,064,062.70 in fees (lodestar of $532,031.35 plus a 2.0 positive multiplier), with the trial judge awarding $400,800.  Both sides appealed, with plaintiff filing a cross-appeal seeking more fees. 

Allocation, Section 1717: No Abuse Of Discretion In Trial Court’s Allocation Which Reduced Plaintiff’s Fee Award To $143,257.92 From Requested $800,165.00, Nor In Its Award Of $105,000 In Fees And $4,609.77 In Costs To Prevailing Defendants

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

Plaintiff Did Not Support Its Arguments With An Adequate Record On Appeal, Citations To The Record And Legal Authority.             Newstart Real Estate Investment v. Huang, Case No. B289513 (2d Dist., Div. 8 December 18, 2020) (unpublished) is a breach of contract, fraud, and conspiracy action involving the sale of a Las Vegas Ramada Inn. 

Scroll to Top