Author name: Marc Alexander

Civil Rights, Lodestar, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: 9th Circuit Remands Post-Settlement Fee Award In Civil Rights Case For Determination of Reasonable Hourly Rate and Settlement Agreement Date To Determine Fees For Work on Unfiled Motions

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

There Was Humor Here—Ninth Circuit Agreed Attorney Petitioning For Fees Was Ill-Advised To Put In A Declaration By A Hawaiian Plumber About What The Plumber Charged!             As you will see, there is some underlying humor simmering in Roberts v. City and County of Honolulu, No. 16-16179 (9th Cir. Sept. 12, 2019) (published).             What […]

Choice Of Law: Prevailing Texas Defendant Sued In California For Dispute Centered In Texas Did Not Meet Its Burden To Show Civil Code Section 1717 Fee Denial Was Incorrect

Cases: Choice of Law

Defendant Did Not Satisfy Nedlloyd Interest Analysis To Swing The Scales Back To California.             This next case may have limited utility because its result really hinged on defendant’s failure to meet its burden of proof under the appropriate choice-of-law analysis.             In River Oaks Self-Storage TIC 4, LP v. River Oaks Storage, LLC, Case

Family Law: $10,000 Needs-Based Fee Award To Wife Reversed Because Family Court Failed To Make Mandatory Findings Required Under Family Code Sections 2030/2032

Cases: Family Law

Fifth District’s Morton Decision Found Persuasive To The 4/1 DCA.             The Fourth District, Division 1 in Marriage of Bustillo, Case No. D075369 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 12, 2019) (unpublished) reversed a $10,000 “needs-based” fee award to ex-wife under Family Code section 2030 and 2032 for a multiday support hearing.  The reason was that

Sanctions: Under 2014 Version Of CCP § 128.5 (Objective Standard Only), Trial Judge Correctly Imposed Sanctions Against Plaintiff For Filing A Complaint Without Evidentiary Support

Cases: Sanctions

Sanctions Order Was $27,253.51 In Fees/Costs, Out Of A Requested $36,304.11.             We have seen an uptick in appeals involving CCP § 128.5 in the last several months, with California’s intermediate appellate courts dealing with the differences in the 2014 and 2017 versions of the statute.  In Avalanche Funding, LLC v. Swickard, Case No. C083954

Sanctions: Lack Of Reporter’s Transcript Of Trial Proceedings Doomed Challenge To CCP § 128.5 Sanctions Order For Plaintiff Prosecuting A Frivolous Discrimination Claim

Cases: Sanctions

Trial Judge Awarded $36,037.54 In Fees (Out Of Requested $298,649) And $18,524.13 (Out Of Requested $54,986.19) To Defendant, Assessed Jointly And Severally Against Plaintiff And Her Attorneys.             The lack of an adequate record doomed an abuse of discretion challenge by plaintiff to a CCP § 128.5 sanctions order in Cabrera v. Popchips, Inc., Case

Discovery, Sanctions: Failure To Designate The Deposition Video In The Appellate Court Doomed Challenge To $11,000 Sanction For Unilaterally Terminating A Videotaped Deposition

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Motion To Augment The Record To Include The Video, One Day After The Appellate Argument, Was Deemed Untimely.             Genesis Media, LLC v. Misle, Case No. B294620 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 10, 2019) (unpublished) is an appeal from a discovery sanction where an inadequate appellate record and untimely motion to augment sealed the fate

Appealability, Receivers: $92,952 In Receivership Fees Affirmed In Judgment In Favor Of Landlord Elks Building Association Of Santa Ana And Against Tenant JK Properties

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Receivers

Appealing Both Merits And Fee Judgments Was Properly Done Here; Special Benefit Doctrine Was Not Proven By Tenant.             In Elks Building Association of Santa Ana v. J.K. Properties, Inc., Case No. G056187 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 10, 2019) (unpublished), tenant JK Properties assumed a lease to the Saddleback Inn in Santa Ana, whose

Private Attorney General, Civil Rights: Plaintiffs’ Bane Act/Whistleblower Retaliation Victories Justified An Award Of Attorney’s Fees Under CCP § 1021.5

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

$1,054,286.88 Was Fee Award Affirmed Against Los Angeles.            Two fired Department of Transportation hearing examiners sued the City of Los Angeles under the Bane Act and for whistleblower retaliation, claiming that the City pressured them to change adverse decisions in hearings on parking citations.  They won their claims before a jury which awarded them

Employment, Multipliers, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: FEHA Plaintiff Properly Awarded Fees At Reduced Hourly Rates, But Augmented By Hourly Rates For Enhancement Factors, And Then Correctly Denied Any Multiplier Beyond That

Cases: Employment, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Almost $1.5 Million In Fees/Costs Sought, But Ultimate Affirmed Award Was About $649,000.             The next case is an interesting example of how a trial judge’s decision to not credit prior fee awards to an employment contingency attorney was affirmed because there was not sufficient foundation to show the prior awards were similar to the

Liens For Attorney’s Fees, Settlement: Judgment Creditor’s Settlement And Release Of Judgment Debtor Did Not Release Interference Claims Against Judgment Creditor’s Attorney Obtaining Judgment Against Judgment Debtor

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Settlement

Interference Claim Was Righteous And Not Released By Judgment Debtor’s Unilateral Settlement With Judgment Creditor.             Mancini & Associates v. Schwetz, Case No. B290498 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Sept. 4, 2019) (published) goes to show you that a client/judgment creditor has no ability to unilaterally release claims that client’s attorney has against a third-party judgment

Scroll to Top