Author name: Marc Alexander

Homeowner Associations:  HOA Properly Awarded Fees Against Trustee And An Individual Suing As Property’s Successor-In-Interest

Cases: Homeowner Associations

Homeowner Was Assessed With About $76,000 In Fees Awardable In HOA’s Favor.             Plaintiff, who sued as a trustee of her deceased father’s trust and individually as successor-in-interest to a condominium property, lost an exclusive garage use dispute against the HOA through a summary judgment motion, which was affirmed on appeal.  HOA then was awarded […]

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717:  Fifth District, In Split Decision, Decides That Permissive Fee Clause Is Enforceable By Its Terms, With Section 1717 Not Applying

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

Dissent Argues That Section 1717 Does Have Precedence In This Situation, So That Fees To Prevailing Party Should Be Determined Upon A Remand.             In City of Dinuba v. Universal Biopharma Research Institute, Inc., Case No. F072497 (5th Dist. Feb. 20, 2018) (unpublished), City of Dinuba filed an unlawful detainer action against two defendants, although

Landlord/Tenant:  Appellate Court Trims Successful Landlord’s Fee Award From $113,096.33 To $49,912.83

Cases: Landlord/Tenant

Cross-Complaint Defense Work Involving Pre-Fees Clause Conduct Primarily Cut By 1/3 DCA.             In a long-standing commercial tenancy dispute producing an earlier appellate opinion reversing a SLAPP motion, a former landlord (plaintiff and cross-defendant) finally prevailed against tenant when the trial judge after a bench trial awarded landlord $85,000 in back rent plus prejudgment interest

Civil Rights/Equity/Multiplier:  Although Total Judgment Offset Denied, Fee Award Based On 2.0 Positive Multiplier Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Equity, Cases: Multipliers

Multiplier Is Not Automatic, So Reversed To Consider Proper Factors On Appeal.             In Campos v. Kennedy, Case Nos. B266663/B268812 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 13, 2018) (unpublished), plaintiff won a $225,000 compensatory verdict under civil rights fee shifting provisions for sexual battery.  Later, the trial court awarded plaintiff $ 2,924,830 in statutory fees, but

Civil Rights:  County Defeated FEHA-Based Harassment/Retaliation Claims Through Summary Judgment, But Fee Award To County Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Civil Rights

$17,945 Fee Award Overturned Because No Bad Faith/Lack Of Reasonable Cause Even Though Case Was Found To Lack Ultimate Merit.             In Delgado v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B271913 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Feb. 13, 2018) (unpublished), County defensed an ex-employee’s FEHA harassment/retaliation claims through a summary judgment motion, with the trial judge

Class Action:  N.D. California District Judge Appoints Special Master To Review Fee Requests By 331 Billers From 53 Law Firms In Anthem Data Breach Class Action Settlement

Cases: Class Actions

Class Attorneys Seeking $37.95 In Fees, 33% Of The $115 Million Settlement Fund.             U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh of the Northern District of California recently issued an order in In re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litig., Case No. 15-MD-02617-LHK (N.D. Cal. Feb 2, 2018, Doc. 972) by which she appointed a special master

Homeowner Associations/Reasonableness Of Fees:  HOA Properly Awarded $31,375 Out Of $91,936 Base Line Lodestar Fee Request

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Trial Judge Did Not Err In Assessing Settlement Offers With Respect To Overall Request.             In Villa Riviera Condominium  Assn. v. Berg, Case No. B269191 (2d Dist., Di. 3 Feb. 8, 2018) (unpublished), HOA did win a CC&R assessment battle against homeowner on a summary judgment motion, then seeking a lodestar amount of $91,936 in

Fees As Damages:  Latham & Watkins Look Like It Won $1.6 Million in Fees, As Damages, In Long-Standing Malicious Prosecution Suit

Cases: Fees as Damages

Trial Judge Found Fees, Although Labeled “Obscene,” Were Normal For Los Angeles Cases Of This Sort.             As reported by Law360, a California state judge recently ruled that Latham & Watkins tentatively was entitled to an award of attorney’s fees to the tune of about $1.6 million as damages in a malicious prosecution case against

Retainer Agreements:  Third Circuit Court Of Appeals, In Nonprecedential Decision, Holds That Binding Arbitration In Retainer Agreement Is Enforceable Under Federal Arbitration Act

Cases: Retainer Agreements

Client’s Informed Consent On Arbitration Clause Was Determinative.             In Smith v. Lindemann, No. 16-3357 (3d Cir. 2017) (non-precedential), an individual sued her former divorce attorney for malpractice even though the services agreements contained a standard arbitration clause saying that the parties “agree to submit such disagreements in binding arbitration.”  The lower court enforced the

Scroll to Top