A History Of Copyrights And Wrongs. David Bellos, an academic, translator, and biographer, and Alexandre Montagu, an IP attorney and founder of MontaguLaw, have written an engaging history of copyright law. Co-contributor to this blog Marc Alexander has written a review of the book. The review is republished here with the permission of the […]
Because Complaint And Cross-Complaint Had Common Core Facts/Issues Which Were Inextricably Intertwined, No Apportionment Was Required—Discretionary, Only. Etched stone at the Robert T. Matsui U.S. Courthouse, Sacramento, California. Carol M. Highsmith, photographer. October 2009. Library of Congress. In Direct Action Everywhere San Francisco Bay Area v. Hsiung, Case No. A169536 (1st Dist.,
Plaintiffs’ Pleadings Showed They Were Not Suing To Enforce Governing CC&Rs. We have done many posts over the years on homeowner disputes, some involving HOAs-homeowners and some just between homeowners. With respect to many HOA disputes, there is a Davis-Stirling Act fee shifting provision which allows the prevailing party in a dispute to enforce
Dispute Involved Town Of Apple Valley’s Effort To Obtain A Private Water System Through Condemnation. Town of Apple Valley v. Apple Valley Ranchos Water, Case No. E078348 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 15, 2025) (published) involved a more than 2-year battle in which Town of Apple Valley (TAV) attempted to acquire a private water
Early Nature Of The RFAs, Unreasonableness Of Fee Request, And Failure To Provide Billing Which Correlated Time To RFA Proof Work Doomed Plaintiff’s Request. Plaintiff in Polaris Blue Holdings, LLC v. Friedman, Case Nos. B316411 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 15, 2025) (unpublished) won a judgment of $14,258.45 against two defendants and
Webinar Took Place Almost 1 ½ Months After The Award, Involving General Tips On Fee Battles In Arbitration. In Silva v. The Signature Motors LLC, Case No. H051552 (6th Dist. Jan. 14, 2025) (unpublished), an arbitrator awarded plaintiff almost $60,000 in attorney’s fees and costs (90% of the request), and the arbitrator 1 ½
Landlord Accepted Rent Check After Notice To Vacate, Such That A Month-To-Month Tenancy Was Reinstated. In Baca v. Kuang, Case No. A171071 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Jan. 13, 2025) (partially published; fee discussion unpublished), defendant tenant appealed from an unlawful detainer judgment, consisting of $51,560 in contractual attorney’s fees and $24,000 in holdover rent.
Plaintiffs’ Lawsuit For Various Counts Relating To A One-Year Lease Did Arise Under Broad Language In The Fees Clause. In S&S Engineering and Construction v. Van Swae, Case No. G062352 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 13, 2025) (unpublished), a lower court’s order denying a fees motion to a possible landlord under a one-year lease
Unpublished Case Has A Nice Discussion On Why A Section 271 Sanctions Denial Is Not A Collateral Order. Unpublished opinions frequently have good discussions on legal issues, which is the case on whether a denial of a Family Code sections 271 request is a collateral order which is immediately appealable. In Marriage of
Laches Ruling Needed To Be Revisited. In Marriage of Goldman, Case No. D082021 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 10, 2025) (partially published; fee discussion unpublished), ex-husband and ex-wife entered into a marital settlement agreement (MSA) which wife claimed was breached and then asked for needs-based fees and costs to enforce it. The lower court
