Author name: Marc Alexander

Partition: Trial Judge Did Not Erroneously Order One Sibling In Partition Action To Pay A Greater Share of Attorney’s Fees Than Other Sibling Parties Based On Being Obstreperous During The Course Of The Litigation

Cases: Partition

Appealing Sibling Ordered To Pay $95,896.43 Out Of $184,847.52 Fee/Costs Award For Partition Litigation Expenses.             In a partition action, the court has discretion to apportion the costs of the action among the parties in proportion to their interests or “such other apportionment as may be equitable.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 874.040.)  These costs encompass […]

Miscellaneous, Default Judgments: 4/3 DCA Vacates Default Judgment And Remands To Determine If CCP § 425.11 Notice Of Damages Was Filed

Cases: Default Judgments, Miscellaneous

If Not, Default Judgment Is Void; If So, Then Inefficiency/Lodestar Factors Must Be Considered On Remand.             Although unpublished, Alshamlan v. Arabian Restaurants, Inc., Case No. G057543 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 12, 2020) (unpublished) is must reading for disabled rights plaintiffs’ attorneys seeking a default judgment against a target defendant.             There, a balance-challenged

Reasonableness Of Fees, Retainer Agreements: Lower Court Properly Denied Attorney’s Fees And Costs For Winning $7,580 Against Ex-Client In Fee Collection Case

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Reason Was That Matter Should Have Been Brought As Limited Civil Case Rather Than An Unlimited One.             Code of Civil Procedure section 1033 grants a trial court discretion to deny, in whole or in part, a plaintiff’s recovery of litigation costs, including attorney’s fees, where the plaintiff brought the action as an unlimited

Intellectual Property: Ninth Circuit Determines, In Case Of First Impression, That A Declaratory Relief Victory On Copyright Abandonment Qualifies For A Potential Fees Recovery Under 17 U.S.C. §505

Cases: Intellectual Property

Fee Denial Vacated And Remanded To Consider Whether It Qualifies Under Discretionary Copyright Fee-Shifting Statute Guidelines.             The Ninth Circuit, in Doc’s Dream, LLC v. Dolores Press, Inc., No. 18-56073 (9th Cir. May 13, 2020) (published), reversed a district judge’s determination in denying a copyright fees request under 17 U.S.C. §505 as a matter of

Family Law: Family Code §§ 1101(g) And 271 Sanctions Order Against Father Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

Purpose Of These Sanctions Is To Spur Candidness Between Parties To Dissolution Action.             In Marriage of Gutierrez, Case No. B291507 (2d Dist., Div. 8 May 6, 2020) (published), among other things, father was sanctioned under Family Code §§ 1101(g) [fee sanctions against spouse violating fiduciary duty of disclosing assets] and 271 [sanctions for prolonging

Homeowner Associations, SLAPP: $2,510 SLAPP Fee Award Affirmed Because No Opposition Filed At Trial Level

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: SLAPP

Fifth District Did Not Have To Decide If Indigency Of Plaintiff, An Argument Not Raised Before The Trial Judge, Could Justify A Fee Reduction Under SLAPP Fee Statute.             The plaintiff/appellant in Cruz v. Abdelaziz, Case No. F077506 (5th Dist. May 6, 2020) (unpublished) got SLAPPed and then failed to file an opposition to a

Appeal Sanctions, SLAPP: $21,870.09 In Appellate SLAPP Fees Affirmed Where Prevailing Defendant Obtained Dismissal Of A SLAPP Merits Appeal For Being Untimely

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: SLAPP

Appellate Court Also Sanctioned Appellant’s Attorney For Relying On Unpublished DCA Opinions.             Westreich v. Higa, Case No. B293726 (2d Dist., Div. 5 May 5, 2020) (unpublished) has two big warnings for attorneys arguing before California appellate courts:  make sure you have a reporter’s transcript in the appellate record when you are challenging the amount

Continuing Legal Education: Co-Contributor Mike Will Present “California Attorney Fees 2020” Webinar For Bridgeport Continuing Education On May 12

CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

Time Slot Is 10:00 – 11:30 A.M., Including Ability To Field Questions From Participants.             On May 12, between 10:00 – 11:30 a.m., co-contributor Mike will present “California Attorney Fees 2020,” a webinar through Bridgeport Continuing Education which features a detailed power point presentation as well as the ability to field questions from participants.    

Scroll to Top