Author name: Marc Alexander

Eminent Domain/Undertaking:  Trial Judge Has Discretion To Impose Undertaking On Defendant Making A Postjudgment Withdrawal Of An Increased Deposit By Condemning Agency

Cases: Eminent Domain, Cases: Undertaking

Undertaking Was Prudent Given Condemnor Was Appealing Abandonment Denial Decision, Such That Attorney’s Fees Might Be In Order Down The Line.             Eminent domain and inverse condemnation are boutique practice areas, but we attempt to report on all substantive areas.  Here is a very technical decision relating to postjudgment withdrawal of an increased deposit made […]

Civil Rights:  Bustos Decision Now Published

Cases: Civil Rights

Opinion Affirmed Fee Denial To Losing FEHA Plaintiff Only Obtaining One Favorable Vote On Jury Special Verdict.             In a December 22, 2017 post, we discussed Bustos v. Global P.E.T., Inc., a Fourth District, Division 2 unpublished decision affirming a denial of FEHA fees to a plaintiff who obtained a favorable vote on one jury

Costs/Employment:   Several California District Judges Deny Recovery Of Routine Costs To Prevailing Defendants In Wage/Hour Cases

Cases: Costs, Cases: Employment

Financial Disparity Is One Of The Big Factors Weighed.             So you represented defendants which/who successfully obtained summary judgment in a plaintiffs’ wage/hour class action case.  You move for recovery of routine costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 1920.  Question is:   Will you get them?  Maybe not.             The reason

Private Attorney General:  Court Of Appeal Affirms Half Of Request By HOA In CEQA Case Where Some Diminution In Property Values Expected But Uncertain In Nature

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Apportionment Of Fees By HOA Helped Satisfy the “Financial Burden” Element Of CCP § 1021.5.             Heron Bay Homeowners Assn. v. City of San Leandro (Halus Power Systems), Case No. A143985 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 12, 2018) (published) is a situation where an HOA did win a CEQA biological issue “on a close call”

Liens For Attorneys Fees:  Martinez Decision Now Published

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees

Dealt With Statutorily Mandated Reduction With Respect to Medi-Cal Liens From A Med Malpractice Settlement.             In a December 19, 2017 post, we discussed Martinez v. Dept. of Health Care Services, Case No. B278117 (2d Dist., Div. 6, filed Dec. 13, 2017), which was unpublished at the time.  The opinion on appeal made a 25%

Taxation:  Revenue And Taxation Code Fee-Shifting Provision Did Not Allow For Fee Shifting Against Assessor Action Where There Was Simply A Misapplication Of Law

Cases: Taxation

Subjective, Cognitive Decision By Assessor That Provision, Rule, Or Regulation Was Unconstitutional/Invalid Was Not Shown To Allow For Fee Shifting. The Fountain of Taxation.  1909.  Library of Congress.             The next case, Land Partners, LLC v. County of Orange, Case No. G053664 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 10, 2018) (unpublished), involves a fee-shifting statute, Revenue

Fee Clause Interpretation:  Fee Clauses Only Allowing Recovery For Arbitration Related Work Did Not Give Entitlement To Fees For Trial Work Only

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Fee Clause Was Unambiguous In Nature.             After a lot of trial activity (including fraud claims adjudicated against a defendant in a bench trial), the successful plaintiff obtained an attorney’s fees award based on an LLC operating agreement provision allowing for fees limited to “reimbursement of attorney fees, costs and expenses incurred in connection with

Construction/Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717:  Fees Clause In Masonry Subcontractor-Material Supplier Contract Did Not Trigger Third Party Beneficiary Exposure Against Real Property Owners Who Did Not Prevail Against Material Supplier

Cases: Construction, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Specific Breadth Of Clause Was Dispositive.             Prince v. Thompson Building Materials, Case No. B280813 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 9, 2018) (unpublished) involved a situation where real property owners sued a material supplier to enforce contractual warranties under a third-party beneficiary against their masonry subcontractor.  Ultimately, owners lost and material supplier sought to recoup

Family Law:  $2,000 Needs-Based Fees Award To Ex-Wife Sustained On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

Record Did Show Disparity In Income Between Spouses.             In Marriage of Cueva, Case No. D071913 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 9, 2018) (unpublished), the family law judge awarded ex-wife Family Code section 2030 needs-based fees of $2,000 after a 9 ½ year marriage involving five children.  Father’s challenges to the award were unavailing on

Scroll to Top