Author name: Marc Alexander

Minors:  Appellate Court Enters “Dueling” Order That 25% Of Minor’s Recovery Was Reasonable Fee Award Or That Money Paid On This Basis Be Disgorged If Lower MICRA Cap Applies

Cases: Minors

Reviewing Court Articulated Protection Of Minor As A Paramount Concern.             Appellate courts are very attuned to protect minors in minor compromise settlements where fee recovery is sought by the attorney representing the minor.  This is well illustrated in Romero v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., Case No. B277499 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 19, […]

Special Fee Shifting Statute:  Personal Injury Plaintiff’s Request For $27,667.50 In Costs For Medical Witness Expenses Properly Stricken

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Reason Was That, Under CCP § 1141.21, Plaintiff Obtained A Jury Trial Verdict In A De Novo Trial Which Was Under A Prior Judicial Arbitration Award.             For unlimited cases where damages are likely not to exceed $50,000, the Legislature has specified a mandatory judicial arbitration process.  Any party may request a trial de novo

Special Fee Shifting Statute:  Personal Injury Plaintiff’s Request For $27,667.50 In Costs For Medical Witness Expenses Properly Stricken

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Reason Was That, Under CCP § 1141.21, Plaintiff Obtained A Jury Trial Verdict In A De Novo Trial Which Was Under A Prior Judicial Arbitration Award.             For unlimited cases where damages are likely not to exceed $50,000, the Legislature has specified a mandatory judicial arbitration process.  Any party may request a trial de novo

Special Fee Shifting Statute:  Personal Injury Plaintiff’s Request For $27,667.50 In Costs For Medical Witness Expenses Properly Stricken

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Reason Was That, Under CCP § 1141.21, Plaintiff Obtained A Jury Trial Verdict In A De Novo Trial Which Was Under A Prior Judicial Arbitration Award.             For unlimited cases where damages are likely not to exceed $50,000, the Legislature has specified a mandatory judicial arbitration process.  Any party may request a trial de novo

Family Law:  $20,000 271 Sanctions Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

No Abuse Of Discretion Demonstrated.             In re Marriage of Rafipoor, Case Nos. G053243/G053665 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 18, 2018) (unpublished) involved a situation where ex-husband was assessed with Family Code section 271 sanctions in the amount of $20,000.  Among other things, the record suggested that husband made a motion with his finger across

Appealability/POOF!/SLAPP:  Reversal Of SLAPP Merits Recovery Means Fee Recovery Went POOF!

Cases: Appealability

SLAPP Fee Award Is Appealable.             In Kessey v. Los Robles Regional Medical Center, Case No. B277523 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Jan. 18, 2018) (unpublished), the appellate court in an earlier unpublished decision reversed an anti-SLAPP order in defendants’ favor.  That meant the defense SLAPP fee recovery of $52,500 also went POOF!  Defendants argued that

Requests For Admissions:  Court Of Appeal Affirms $227,213.50 Costs Of Proof Sanctions Assessed Below

Cases: Requests for Admission

Appellant Did Not Meet Its Burden Of Showing Why Claims Costs Were Unrelated To RFAs Targeted In the Costs-Of-Proof Sanctions Motion.             Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.420(a) allows the trial court to impose costs-of-proof sanctions against a party failing to admit requests for admissions (RFAs) unless certain exceptions exist.  MK Greentea Limited, Inc. v.

Scroll to Top