Author name: Marc Alexander

Probate: 5th Dist. Court Of Appeal Reversed Award To Atty Not Representing Conservator For Providing Assistance To Public Guardian, But Recognized Equitable Cases Allowed Partial Fee Award For Atty In Obtaining Appointment of Conservator Public Guardian

Cases: Probate

Probate Code Section 2642 Was Not The Right Statute, But Estate of Moore Allowed For Partial Fees To Attorney Upon Equitable Grounds.             In Conservatorship of Smith, Case No. F073436 (5th Dist. May 24, 2018) (unpublished), the lower court granted an attorney assisting the Public Guardian as conservator after helping obtain the conservatorship appointment. The […]

Family Law: Ex-Husband Receives Full $138,000 Of Fee Request Against Ex-Wife For Modifying Support Order And Ex-Wife Only Received $10,627 In Fees Out Of Requested $159,783 Fee Request Against Ex-Husband Under Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Provision.

Cases: Family Law

Ex-Husband Obtained A Lopsided Win, With Both Parties Expending $1 Million In Litigation Costs Since Separation.            Attorney’s fees awards in family law setting are extremely discretionary and the end rest of litigation costs for both parties along the way, even with some reimbursement awards allowed, can certainly make destitute or bankrupt any party. This is

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Trial Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion In Awarding $95,000 in Attorney’s Fees To Plaintiff Under CCP 1021.4, Discretionary Fee-Shifting Provision Where Civil Cases Involves Defendant’s Felony Offense(s).

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Plaintiff Requested $1.3 Million In Fees, But Trial Court Found Lack Of Success Required Steep Discount And No 1.75 Positive Multiplier Justified Where Case Was Not Novel/Was Not That Difficult.             Defendant was found liable on several (4) tort counts for sexually abusing his niece when she was between 8-10 (the plaintiff). Before trial, the

Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Trial Judge’s Failure To Determine If Defendant Was Prevailing Party Under Civil Code Section 1717 Was Reversed And Remanded For A Determination

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Finding That Neither Side Prevailed For Routine Costs Did Not Decide Section 1717 Prevailing Party Issue.             In AAWestwood, LLC v. Liberal Arts 677 Benevolent Foundation, Case No. B275717 (2d Dist., Div. 5 May 23, 2018) (unpublished), defendant won non-monetary relief under its cross-complaint while plaintiff lost some claims but won a net $3,809.52 in

Consumer Statutes: Defendant/Cross-Complainant Properly Awarded Attorney’s Fees Against One Unsuccessful Cross-Defendant, But Other Cross-Defendants Correctly Denied Fees Under Consumer Statutes And Civil Code Section 1717 Even Though Cross-Complainant

Cases: Consumer Statutes

Cross-Complainant Did Win $140,550.51, Slightly Reduced Lodestar Enhanced By 1.5 Multiplier, Against One Cross-Defendant.             Professional Collection Consultants v. Lujan, Case Nos. A147922/A148925 (1st Dist, Div. 2 May 22, 2018) (partially published; fee discussion unpublished) is a situation where plaintiff filed to collect upon a credit card debt, with defendant responding by filing a cross-complaint

Cases Under Review: SCOTUS Grants Certiorari To Settle Conflict In Circuit Courts On Exactly What Actions Are Covered By The Statutory Cap On Attorney’s Fees In Social Security Benefit Matters

Cases: Cases Under Review

Fairly Even Split Among The Circuit Courts Passing On The Issue.             On May 21, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court made public that it has granted certiorari in Culbertson v. Berryhill, No. 17-773. The issue to be decided was framed this way: Whether fees subject to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)’s 25-percent cap related to the

In The News . . . . State Of Idaho Approves A Payout Of $75,000 In Attorney’s Fees To Two Idaho Women Successfully Challenging State’s Ban On Changing The Gender Listed On A

In The News

Fees Might Have Been Over $99,000 Sans The Settlement, With Federal Court Earlier Finding The Ban Violated The Equal Protection Clause Of The Fourteenth Amendment.           According to a column by Betsy Z. Russell which can be found at a May 18, 2018 post on the Idaho Press-Tribune’s website, Idaho’s top officials approved a $75,000 payout

Civil Rights: UPS Properly Awarded $52,870.50 In FEHA Attorney’s Fees For Defending Disability Discrimination Claims Found Objectively Without Foundation When Brought

Cases: Civil Rights

Only A Quarter Of Fee Request Awarded.           Mariano v. United Parcel Service, Inc., Case No. D071055 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 21, 2018) (unpublished) was a situation where a trial judge eventually found plaintiff’s associational disability discrimination theory was deficient because plaintiff had no specific relationship with a disabled person or and no such association

Consumer Statutes, Section 998: Defense Served A Proper 998 Offer With Valid Terms For Settlement Under The Song-Beverly Act

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Section 998

Defense Agreed To Pay $7,500 For Plaintiff’s Fees And Costs Or, Alternatively, An Amount To Be Determined On Noticed Motion.          A valid CCP § 998 offer to compromise is a valid cost-shifting mechanism under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (commonly known as California’s “lemon law”). Kia Motors America, Inc. offered to pay plaintiff $30,000.01 plus

Settlement, Special Fee Shifting Statute: Ten-Day Settlement Offer Under IDEA Not Specifying Whether School District Would Pay Disabled Student’s Pre-Offer Attorney’s Fees And Costs Justified Parent In Rejecting Offer

Cases: Settlement, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Result Is That Matter Is Remanded So Post-Offer Reasonable Fees Can Be Awarded; Both Majority and Concurring Opinions Suggest School Districts Need To Make Their Offers Clear In Nature.             The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) is a boutique practice involving a federal statute under which parents and school districts can resolve disputes over

Scroll to Top