Author name: Marc Alexander

In The News . . . . Massachusetts U.S. District Judge Awards Class Counsel $15.468 Million In Fees And Nearly $1.2 Million In Expenses In Volkswagen & Audi Engine Warranty Class Action

In The News

  Earlier, First Circuit Reversed Earlier Fees/Costs Awards After Determining State, Not Federal, Law Applied To Determination Of The Awards.      In In re Volkswagen & Audi Warranty Extension Litigation, 692 F.3d 4 (1st Cir. 2012), which happens to be a multidistrict class action involving oil sludge buildup in engines and related warranties, a settlement […]

Civil Rights: Losing ADA Plaintiff’s Suit Was Not Frivolous Such That District Court’s Fee Denial Was Correct

Cases: Civil Rights

  Plaintiff’s Case Resulted in Published Decision Clarifying “Equivalent Facilitation” Issue Which Had A Prior Split Result Between Two District Courts.      Alice Roosevelt Longworth and Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., with men in wheelchairs.  1927.  Library of Congress.      Plaintiff, a disabled person using a wheelchair, sued defendant—running a retail clothing store “House of Flava”—under Title

Special Fee Shifting Statute, Prevailing Party: Individual Defendant Having Prior Property In Public Nuisance Case Properly Denied Fees/Costs Recovery

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Fee Entitlement Not Present; Normal Routine Prevailing Party Costs Definition Did Not Apply Based On A Pragmatic Inquiry.      In City of Ridgecrest v. Howard, Case No. F068679 (5th Dist. Mar. 5, 2015) (unpublished), defendants were ordered to abate a public nuisance on properties having alleged dilapidated equipment and other items. However, one defendant

Probate: Unsuccessfully Objecting Beneficiary Had To Bear Trustee’s Attorney’s Fees For Defending Against Unreasonable, Bad Faith-Inspired Objections

Cases: Probate

  Lower Court’s Factual Findings Below Buttressed Affirmance.      Beneficiaries objecting to trustees’ accountings need to make sure their objections are reasonable and not inspired by bad faith. If not, you face having to bear the exposure of trustees’ attorney’s fees in defending against such objections. (Prob. Code, § 17211; Uzyel v. Kadsha, 188 Cal.App.4th

Homeowner Associations: Defendant Homeowner Prevailing In Plaintiff HOA’s Common Interest Development Enforcement Suit Involving Governing Documents Entitled To Fees Even If No Valid CID/Governing Document Were Proven To Exist

Cases: Homeowner Associations

  Civil Code Former Section 1354(c) Fee-Shifting Provision At Issue—Mutuality Principles Applied to Insure “Prevailing Party” Obtains Fees.      The California Supreme Court has extended application of mutuality principles outside of Civil Code section 1717 to prevailing homeowner defendants in common interest development (CID) enforcement suits brought by non-prevailing homeowner associations in Tract 19051 Homeowners

Lodestar, Multiplier, Private Attorney General, Reasonableness Of Fees, Substantiation Of Fees: Plaintiff’s Attorneys Garner $721,994.81 In Fee Recovery For Successfully Arguing City Of Los Angeles Could Not “Outsource” Initial Review Of

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  However, Many of the Nonstatutory Costs Were Taxed.      Although we do not often post about trial court decisions involving fees and costs, Caleb Marker of Ridout Lyon + Ottoson, LLP in Long Beach sent us copies of the fees and costs rulings in Weiss v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. BC141354 (L.A.

Homeowner Associations: $1,180,646.50 Fee/$27,730 Costs Award Against HOA Owners And In Favor Of HOA Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Homeowner Associations

  All This Over Short-Term Rental Regulations Involving A Little Over $10,000 In Total Delinquencies.      This next case is somewhat frightening for all litigants and practitioners—no matter what substantive areas you practice in. It does echo our “Mission Statement,” which we have referenced many times but will not boar our steady readers with again.

Consumer Statutes, Prevailing Party, Private Attorney General: Plaintiff Losing Unfair Competition Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act Claims Properly Denied Fee Request Of $337,443

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Plaintiff Was Not Successful and Defendant Fixed Problem Based on CLRA Pre-Suit Notice.      In Boling v. DTG Operations, Inc., Case No. G049360 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 2, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiff sued under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) to recover damages for a small discrepancy between a

Civil Rights: $94,602.34 Fee Award And $2,058.21 Cost Award Based On District Court Conclusion Of Frivolity/Improper Purpose Under Various Disability Civil Rights Statute Tossed Out

Cases: Civil Rights

  Some Aspects Affirmed But Remanded, Some Reversed Outright, And Appellate Fee Issue Remanded To Commissioner To Allocate.      C.W. v. Capistrano Unified School Dist., No. 12-57315 (9th Cir. Mar. 2, 2015) (published) is an interesting case involving a school district prevailing defendant in a disabled child lawsuit, involving claims under the Individuals with Disabilities

Scroll to Top