Defense Counsel Did A Wise Thing: Reduced $150,000 Prior Request Down To $35,000 In Its Reply Brief—Getting The Lower Ask In Toto. Baptiste v. Ralph Grocery Co., Case No. D082554 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 28, 2024) (unpublished) is a good example of prudent judgment exercised by defense counsel. The case involved a CCP […]
Unpublished Solis Decision, From The 2/5 DCA, Follows Reasoning In Recently Published Hernandez Opinion Over A Dissent. On May 24, 2024, we posted on Hernandez v. Sohnen Enterprises, Inc., a May 22, 2024 2/5 DCA opinion which was published, deciding CCP § 1281.97 orders are appealable and § 1281.97 was preempted by the FAA
In Dicta, Appellate Court Suggested 998 Offers May Not Be Barred In Probate Litigation. Estate of Howell, Case No. D081920 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 23, 2024) (unpublished) is interesting reading for probate practitioners. This case involved a battle over attorney fee compensation to be divided between the administrator wife of a deceased
Opinion Reminds Practitioners To Separately Appeal Costs And Fee Orders. In California Spine and Neurosurgery Institute v. Boston Scientific Corp., Case No. H049966 (6th Dist. May 23, 2024) (unpublished), plaintiff lost its case, resulting in a final merits judgment which was entered nunc pro tunc earlier and a later adverse costs award of $8,974.12,
Dissent Disagrees That FAA Is Offended By Section 1281.97. In Hernandez v. Sohnen Enterprises, Inc., Case No. B323303 (2d Dist., Div. 5 May 22, 2024) (published), a 2-1 panel decided that the FAA preempts the CCP § 1281.97 deadline requiring that an arbitration is forfeited unless the employer pays expenses within 30 days unless
60-Day Deadline To Compel Runs From Proper Service Of The Subpoena, No Separate Statement Absolutely Required If Motion Provides A Road Map, And Post-Motion Meet And Confer Discovery Efforts Are Not Compensable As A Cost In Bringing A Motion To Compel. Marriage of Moore, Case No. A165038 (1st Dist., Div. 4 May 21, 2024)
Significant Benefit Incurred, If Injunctive Relief Was Considered, And Other Objections Were Not Specific To Justify Any Reduction. In Doskocz v. ALLS Lien Services, Case No. A166299 (1st Dist., Div. 1 May 20, 2024) (partially published; fee discussion unpublished), class counsel prevailed on behalf of plaintiffs in case involving some novel and complex issues
Ninth Circuit Affirmed District Judge’s Denial Of Fees For Failure To Meet And Confer For Purposes Of Seeing If Fee Dispute Could Be Resolved. District court local rules have the “force of law.” Prevailing plaintiff’s counsel learned that all too well, with his failure to follow one resulting in a complete denial of a
However, The Opinion Does Introduce Fuzziness On The Geographical Community For Lodestar Analysis Purposes. In Hoglund v. Sierra Nevada Memorial-Miners Hospital, Case No. C097065 (3d Dist. May 17, 2024) (partially published; fee discussion published), plaintiff won a case with FEHA claims against defendant, obtaining a $958,297, inclusive of a 1.5 multiplier, out of a
No Costs Memorandum Was Required To Seek Fees, But City Failure’s To File Did Bar It From Obtaining Costs—Kaufman Decision Found Applicable To Statutory Fee Request. In Green Lotus Entertainment, Inc. v. City of Montclair, Case No. E079531 (4th Dist., Div. 2 May 16, 2024) (unpublished), City obtained a preliminary injunction against certain cross-defendants,
