Marc Alexander – Page 325 – Cal Attorneys Fees

Taxation: Tax Court’s Denial Of Fee Recovery To Innocent Spouse, Whose Qualified Settlement Offer Was Rejected, Was Improper Because Later IRS Concession Of Relief Was Not A Settlement

July 18, 2015

Internal Revenue Code Section 7340(g) Fee-Shifting Provision Was At Issue. Knudsen v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, No. 13-72077 (9th Cir. July 15, 2015) (published) dealt with a very narrow issue under Internal Revenue Code section 7340(g)’s fee-shifting statutory provision: whether the IRS’s concession after letting a claimed innocent spouse taxpayer’s qualified offer to […]

Appeal Sanctions: Sanctions For Frivolous Appeal Can Be Hefty

Cases: Appeal Sanctions

July 16, 2015

Second District, Division 5 Issues $53,153.44 Sanctions Against Losing Appellant. The price for a frivolous appeal seems to be going up, as demonstrated in Johnson v. Syed, Case No. B258701 (2d Dist., Div. 5 July 15, 2015) (unpublished). A losing appellant in that cause was ordered to pay $53,153.44 in fees incurred by

Class Action: Out-Of-State Counsel Never Getting Pro Hac Vice Admission Denied Fees

Cases: Class Actions

July 16, 2015

In-State Class Counsel Only Garner $11,000 In Fees/Costs Out Of $36,290.50 Lodestar. Class counsel must have been disappointed when the trial court refused to award any fees/costs to out-of-state counsel never admitted pro hac vice in the case and awarded only $11,000 in fees/costs out of the requested $36,290.50 lodestar (nixing a multiplier

Class Action: N.D. Cal. Magistrate Judge Awards O’Bannon Class Counsel In NCAA Litigation Nearly $46 Million In Fees, Costs, And Expenses

Cases: Class Actions

July 15, 2015

In Doing So, He Reduces About $5 Million Of Class Counsel Request, But Invokes “Game Of Thrones” To Reject NCAA’s Argument That Only $8.5 Million Should Be Awarded. A class of football and men’s basketball players won antitrust claims against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) for use of their names, images, and

Intellectual Property, Celebrities: S.D.N.Y. District Judge Awards $667,849.14 In Attorney’s Fees Out Of $2.4 Million Request To Beastie Boys Based On Willful Copyright Infringement Win Against Monster Energy Company

Cases: Celebrities, Cases: Intellectual Property

July 12, 2015

No Basis For Fees Under Lanham Act “Exceptional Case” Fee Shifting, With Fee Reductions Made For Partner Heavy Staffing, Inefficiencies, Unsuccessful Work Effort, And The Fee-Shifting Policy Underlying Copyright Act. Beastie Boys sued Monster Energy Company for copyright and trademark (false endorsement) infringement against Monster Energy Company, the maker of the Monster

Consumer Statutes/Section 998: McKenzie Lemon Law Decision Involving Two 998 Offers Now Published

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Section 998

July 12, 2015

4/3 DCA Unpublished Decision Now On The Books! On June 14, 2015, we posted on McKenzie v. Ford Motor Co., a Fourth District, Division 3 decision reversing a fee award under California’s lemon law based on a lower court’s erroneous determination that two 998 offers were similar enough to deny an award of

Private Attorney General: Property Owners Winning Easement Dispute Involving Private/Public Rights Properly Denied CCP Section 1021.5 Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

July 10, 2015

Judgment Saying “Fees According To Proof” Did Not Determine Entitlement, And Winners Did Not Satisfy Private Enforcement Element Of 1021.5. Property owners in Citrus Heights got involved in a dispute over a private easement and overlapping public easement, with the City actually getting involved and using an offer of dedication to create a

Undertaking: Siry Investments Decision Certified For Publication

Cases: Undertaking

July 10, 2015

Opinion Deals With “Retroactivity” Of Amended CRC With Respect To Appeal Undertaking Lending Expenses. On June 19, 2015, we posted on Siry Investments, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour, a Second District, Division 2 unpublished opinion considering the retroactivity of an amended CRC relating to appeal undertaking lending expenses. We can now report that it was

Cases Under Review: California Supreme Court Grants Review Of County of Los Angeles Board Of Supervisors Decision

Cases: Cases Under Review

July 9, 2015

7-0 Was The Vote. Yesterday, we posted on LACBA’s letter request to the California Supreme Court to either grant review or depublish County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court (ACLU), a Second District decision finding that attorney billing statements were privileged and did not have to be disclosed under California’s

Civil Rights, Substantiation: L.A. County Bar Association Requests Depublication/Review Grant From California Supreme Court On County of Los Angeles Board Of Supervisors v. Superior Court

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

July 8, 2015

Implications On Fee Motions Provide First Ground Underlying Request. On April 19, 2015, we posted on County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court (ACLU), 235 Cal.App.4th 1154 (2015), which held that attorney billing records were privileged and immune from discovery under a Government Code exemption. We did observe that this would

Author name: Marc Alexander