Author name: Marc Alexander

Class Actions: With Respect to Removed Matters From State Court, Prospective Attorney’s Fees Allowable Under A Statute Or Contract Are To Be Considered For Determining Amount In Controversy For Removal Purposes

Cases: Class Actions

Ninth Circuit So Holds, Even Though There Does Seem To Be A Split Among Other District Courts.             In Arias v. Residence Inn by Marriott, No. 19-55803 (9th Cir. Sept. 3, 2019) (published), defendant filed a notice of removal of a state court wage/hour class action case to federal court.  It did so under the […]

Prevailing Party: Settling Plaintiff Abandoning Some Claims, Suffering A Summary Adjudication, And Only Obtaining A Much Scaled-Back Settlement Payment On One Claim, Was Properly Found To Not Be A Prevailing Party For Fee Recovery Purposes

Cases: Prevailing Party

This Was A Discretionary Call, Which Was Affirmed; Appellate Court Refused To Find That Appellate Fees Were Appropriate Either, With An Interesting Discussion On Why Documents Were Improperly Sealed By Trial Court With Respect to Fee Proceedings.             Although a settling plaintiff was found not be to a prevailing party for fee recovery purposes, the

Homeowner Associations: Adams Stirling Law Firm In Los Angeles Has An Excellent Summary Of Fee Shifting Provisions With Respect To HOA And Davis-Stirling Act Issues

Cases: Homeowner Associations

Numerous Civil Code and CCP Provisions, As Well Case Law, Summarized By The Firm On Its Website.             We would like to thank Adams Stirling, a Los Angeles law firm specializing in HOA issues, for its excellent summary of HOA and Davis-Stirling Act fees issues and case law, which we post verbatim below and which

Landlord/Tenant: Reversal Of Tenant’s Civil Harassment Restraining Order In Landlord/Tenant Dispute Did Not Require Fee Award In Landlord’s Favor

Cases: Landlord/Tenant

Trial Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion In Denying Fees Under CCP § 527.6(s).             In Ewing v. Greenlee, Case No. A155828 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 30, 2019) (unpublished), a trial judge denied a discretionary request for a $15,000 attorney’s fees award by the prevailing party in a civil harassment.  Code of Civil Procedure

Fee Clause Interpretation: Plaintiff Obtaining Breach Of Contract Damages In Court Lawsuit Was Not Entitled To Fee Recovery, Because Fees Clause Only Applied To Arbitration Results

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Contractual Interpretation Of Fees Clause So Confirmed.            A plaintiff sued and obtained contractual breach damages of $317,512, but really wanted to obtain prevailing party fees under a contractual fees clause.  The trial court did not bite, and the same too for the appellate court in SPAP Company, LLC v. Clinical Products, LLC, Case No.

Costs, Deadlines, Reasonableness Of Fees, SLAPP: 2/3 DCA Affirms SLAPP Fee Award To Defendant Of $53,915.50, The Full Defense Request, Rejecting Untimely Motion Filing Argument

Cases: Costs, Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: SLAPP

However, Costs Award Reversed Because It Was Untimely Filed And Prejudiced Plaintiff.             In Residual Income Opportunities, Inc. v. Cynergy Data, LLC, Case No. B289219 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 29, 2019) (unpublished), the defense won a SLAPP motion, filing for recovery of costs to the tune of $3,567.77 and moving for attorney’s fees totaling

Consumer Statutes, Deeds Of Trust: Third District Agrees That TRO Relief Can Justify Fee Recovery To Prevailing Borrower Under The California Homeowner Bill Of Rights Even If Borrower Loses Later Preliminary Injunction

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Deeds of Trust

This Decision Tracks The Reasoning Of The Fifth District In Hardie.             In Bustos v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case No. C085657 (3d Dist. Aug. 28, 2019) (partially published), the Third District Court of Appeal agreed that a borrower obtaining a temporary restraining order (TRO) under the California Homeowner Bill of Rights (HBOR) for a

Prevailing Party: Defendant/Cross-Complainant Prevailing On Note W/Contractual Fees Clause Not Subject To Fee Exposure On Subsequent Appeals And Lis Pendens Expungement Proceeding, As Other Side Never Sought Specialized Fee Relief From Appellate Court

Cases: Prevailing Party

Prevailing Party Did Accept Satisfaction Of Judgment While Appeals Were Pending, With Court Of Appeal Concluding There Can Only Be One Prevailing Party; CCP § 128.5 Sanctions Also Inapt.             De la Carriere v. Greene, Case No. B285793 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Aug. 28, 2019) (published) is a good addition

Probate: Intestate Estate Co-Administrators/Beneficiaries, Defending An Appeal By Which Distribution Of Assets Denied To Certain Claimed Beneficiaries, Justified Compensation For Appellate Fee Work Incurred By Them

Cases: Probate

Common Fund Doctrine Or Expenses Of Administration Theory Justified Compensation.             In Estate of Ochoa, Case No. A150018 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 27, 3019) (unpublished), a dispute arose involving intestate inheritance rights between statutory heirs of the decedent and siblings of the decedent’s predeceased spouse erupted, with the probate court determining the estate should

Scroll to Top