Author name: Marc Alexander

Bankruptcy: Client’s Statement About A Single Asset To Pay Off Attorneys’ Unpaid Receivable Can Be A Statement Respecting The Client/Later Chapter 7 Debtor’s Financial Condition Which Is Dischargeable In A Bankruptcy Case According To SCOTUS

Cases: Bankruptcy Efforts

SCOTUS Put Particular Focus On The Word “Respecting.”             In Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling, No. 16-1215 (U.S. Supreme Ct. June 4, 2018), SCOTUS faced a situation where a client told his law firm that he could cover future legal expenses, after falling behind, based on an expected tax refund, with the law […]

In The News, Insurance: First Circuit Court Of Appeals Decides AIG Insurance Must Reimburse Bill Cosby For Defense Attorney’s Fees And Costs In Defamation Suits Involving Sexual Molestation Cases

Cases: Insurance, In The News

Result Was The Same Under Massachusetts Or California Law.             In AIG Property Casualty Co. v. William H. Cosby, Jr., No. 17-1505 (1st Cir. June 7, 2018), the First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district judge’s decision holding that, under Massachusetts law, AIG Insurance had to a duty to reimburse Bill Cosby for attorney’s

Allocation, Homeowner Associations: Neighbor Winning $784,208 In Damages Against Another Neighbor Based On CC&R/Nuisance/Prospective Economic Advantage Damages Properly Awarded CC&R Fees Of $363,571.56

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Record

Lack Of Fee Hearing Transcript Meant No Adequate Record On Appeal; However, Claims Looked To Be Interrelated Such That No Apportionment Was Required.                We have noticed an increasing trend among appellate courts to affirm fee awards or fee denials where the appealing litigant failed to provide a reporter’s transcript, especially where abuse of discretion

Allocation, Employment, Section 998: Trial Judge Correctly Awarded Substantial Fees And Costs On Labor Code Vacation Pay Claim, In 2-1 Appellate Decision

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Employment, Cases: Section 998

Vacation Pay Award Totaled $28,500, With Prevailing Plaintiff Winning Subsequent Fees Of $495,549.75 And Costs Of $84,035.40.             Curran v. Schools of the Sacred Heart-San Francisco, Case Nos. A142615/A143646 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 5, 2018) (unpublished) was a case where plaintiff, dean of students at defendant, did not have her contract extended after 37

Sanctions: 2/1 DCA, In Unpublished Decision, Determines That Trial Court Must Comply With CCP § 128.7 Safe Harbor Rule Before Sanctioning Party For Violating CCP § 1008 Reconsideration Prohibitions

Cases: Sanctions

Trial Judge Did Not Notify Putative Sanctioned Party That It Would Be Sanctioned Sans A Withdrawal Of The Reconsideration Motion.             Moofly Productions, LLC v. Favila, Case No. B282084 (2d Dist., Div. 1 June 1, 2018) (unpublished) demonstrates that trial judges, just like litigants, must satisfy CCP § 128.7 sanctions safe harbor requirements before doling

Reasonableness Of Fees, Settlement: $47,604.50 Fee Award To Defendants For Enforcing Settlement Agreement Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Settlement

Nothing Demonstrated Agreement Was Protected By Mediation Privilege And Failure To Object To Particular Entries Waived Any Real Challenge To Reasonableness Of Claimed Fees.             Although there was some initial confusion on whether defendants wanted to enforce a settlement agreement with a “prevailing parties” fees clause, it looks like defendants took the plunge and then

Request For Admissions: $56,700 Proof-Of-Sanctions Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Requests for Admission

Lack Of Reporter’s Transcript Sealed The Result.             In Ayoub v. Candee, Case No. D073279 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 31, 2018) (unpublished), adjoining rural property owners in Temecula got into an “ado” regarding easements. Eventually, the losing parties/appellants were hit with $59,700 in attorney’s fees for making unjustified requests for admission denials under CCP

Intellectual Property: Fourth Circuit Court Of Appeals Determine Preponderance Of Evidence Burden Of Proof Governs And No Need To Show Bad Faith In “Exceptional” Lanham Act Cases For Purposes Of Fee Shifting

Cases: Intellectual Property

Fourth Circuit Joins Fifth And Ninth Circuits On Preponderance of Evidence Burden Of Proof.             In Verisign Incorporated v. XYZ.COM, LLC, No. 17-1704 (4th Cir. May 29, 2018) (published), the Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded an attorney’s fees denial order in a Lanham Act case. In doing so, the federal appeals court decided: (1) the

Scroll to Top