Author name: Marc Alexander

Prevailing Party, Special Fee Shifting Statute: Fee Award Against Plaintiff Dismissing Domestic Violence Restraining Action Against Defendant, Where Records Were Not Sealed, Was Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Plaintiff Dismissed Her Action, After Initial Successes, Not On The Merits But For Fear Of Her Safety, Such That Fees Were Unwarranted Under The Peculiar Circumstances.             So, who says that appellate jurists are not sometimes convinced by unique circumstances to find that an attorney’s fees award against a litigant should be reversed? Not us, […]

Mediation, Section 1717: $1 Million Fee Recovery to Alter Ego Defendant Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Mediation, Cases: Section 1717

Alter Ego Theory Supported Fee Entitlement, With Alter Ego Individual Defendant Not Having To Satisfy Mediation Condition Precedent Clause In The Purchase Agreement.             In Pasternack v. McFarland, Case No. D073283 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 17, 2018) (unpublished), plaintiff brought both contract and tort claims against various businesses and individuals (including alter ego theories

In The News . . . . U.S. District Judge Russell (W.D. Okla.) Slashes Successful Plaintiff Coalition’s Fee Request By More Than 75% After Religious Freedom Restoration Act Win Against Government In ACA Contraceptive Mandate Suit

In The News

Reduction Was Due To Inflated Hourly Rates And Failure To Provide Breakdown Of Fees.             Although we are going by public reports of this decision, it is a reminder to be candid in fee submissions and follow a court’s directives to provide allocations/breakdown of fees in fee petition/motion proceedings.             Catholic Benefits Association LCA v.

Intellectual Property: Federal Circuit Vacates More Than $51 Million Fee Award Against Unsuccessful Patent Infringement Plaintiffs Because The Award Failed To Analyze A Connection Between The Fees Awarded As Measured Against Plaintiffs’ Misconduct

Cases: Intellectual Property

Some Causal Nexus Required To Keep Patent-Shifting Fee Awards Compensatory, Rather Than Punitive, In Nature.             In re Rembrandt Technologies LP Patent Litig., No. 2017-1784 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 15, 2018) (precedential) involved a situation where patent infringement plaintiffs lost their claims against dozens of defendants (mainly cable companies, cable equipment manufacturers, and broadcast networks) relating

Probate: Powell v. Tagami Opinion Now Published

Cases: Probate

Deals With Compensability of Mediation, Personal Attorney, and Accounting Objection Fees.             In an August 9, 2018 post, we discussed the unpublished opinion in Powell v. Tagami, a Fourth District, Division 1 decision relating to probate compensation for mediation work, personal litigant work, and accounting objector work where unwarranted ad hominem attacks were levied against

Private Attorney General: Hall v. DMV Opinion Now Certified For Publication

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Deals With The Issue Of Whether Plaintiff Was A Successful Party – He Was Not.             In a July 20, 2018 post, we discussed Hall v. Superior Court, a 4th District, Division 1 case which considered whether a plaintiff was a “successful party” for purposes of a private attorney general fees award under either the “primary objective” or “before

Pleading: Default Judgment Containing Fee Recovery Modified To Reduce The Recovery Where No Entitlement For Fees Shown

Cases: Pleading

Improper To Enter Default Judgment Where Fees Were Not Authorized By Statute or Contract.             In Luginbill v. Salva, Case No. E068549 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 15, 2018) (unpublished), plaintiff only demanded $11,500 base damages, plus interest, plus $2,500 in attorney’s fees, in plaintiff’s complaint. No Statement of Damages was sent indicating any punitive

Family Law: Section 271 Sanctions Award Of $50,000 Against Ex-Husband Reversed On Due Process Grounds

Cases: Family Law

None Of Ex-Wife’s Papers Before A Critical Hearing Specifically Referenced Section 271, Requiring A Reversal Without Prejudice.             This next case, Marriage of Bauer, Case No. H041338 (6th Dist. Aug. 10, 2018) (unpublished), teaches an important due process lesson in family law cases: if you are going after fees as Family Code section 271 sections

Scroll to Top