Author name: Marc Alexander

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Voluntarily Dismissed Defendant On Tort Claims Not Entitled To Fee Recovery Because It Was A Nonsignatory Not Falling Into Important Exceptions

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Fee Request For $928,791.25 Never Happened As An Award.     One must be careful on how one is positioned as far as status in attorney’s fees disputes, because nonsignatories must push the right “buttons” or they risk losing fees, which happened to the defendant/appellant in Seaport Village Ltd. v. Terramar Retail Centers, Case No. […]

California State Cases Under Review At 2015 Year-End

Cases: Cases Under Review

       In a supplement to our normal Top 20 California fees/costs decision (sorry, Dave Letterman, beard and all, we doubled your efforts even though you are in retirement but we enjoyed your Top 10 every night you were on air), here is a summary of cases pending in front of the California Supreme Court

Allocation: Two Unpublished Decisions Address “To Apportion, Or To Not Apportion,” With Divergent Results Based On The Particular Facts

Cases: Allocation

       The next two cases indicate that decisions to apportion fees for “fee eligible” versus “non-fee eligible” work almost always depend on the facts and circumstances of the case, especially where there are clear avenues to make an apportionment. However, if everything is truly intertwined, trial judges have broad discretion to decide not to

Reasonableness Of Fees/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: $180,880 Fee Award To Prevailing FEHA Plaintiff Winning $92,500 Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Dueling Appeals Resulted In No Change To Fee Award.      Alvarez v. W&L Harris Ranches, LLC, Case No. C074421 (3d Dist. Dec. 21, 2015) (unpublished) is an interesting case which primarily discusses the level of substantiation needed in a fee proceeding. It reinforces that California state court judges have a lot of discretion in

Lodestar/Civil Rights: Sixth District Reverses Civil Rights Fee Award, 80% Of Requested Amount, Based On Trial Judge’s Failure To Provide A Meaningful Explanation Of The Reduction

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar

  Court of Appeal Applies Ninth Circuit’s Gates And Moreno Decisions.            Getting a haircut.  Camp Shelby.  1941.  William Perlitch, photographer.  Library of Congress.    Kerkeles v. City of San Jose, Case No. H040915 (6th Dist. Dec. 18, 2015) (published) is a significant 2015 end-of-the year decision, where an appellate court adopted the Ninth Circuit’s

Scroll to Top