Author name: Marc Alexander

Prevailing Party: Plaintiffs, Whose Damage Recovery Was Outstripped By Defense Appellate Costs Awarded Earlier, Were Not Prevailing Parties Entitled To Fee Recovery

Cases: Prevailing Party

  Goodman v. Lozano Paved the Way on This One.      In Farkas v. 4528 Colbath LLC, Case No. B250440 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 9, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiffs in a retrial did “net” about $60,000 on a negligence claim (inclusive of one particular plaintiff winning damages on a wrongful eviction claim). However, in an […]

Equity/POOF!/Substantiation Of Fees: Reversal Of Default Judgment To Ex-Attorneys Against Client Meant Award Of Fees Had To Be Revisited Also

Cases: Equity, Cases: POOF!, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Further, Costs Needed To Be Authenticated Better.      Bohm, Matsen, Kegel & Aguilera v. Bonilla, Case No. G048212 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 9, 2014) (unpublished), authored by Justice Bedsworth, had this to say about a default judgment which needed some more development on remand: “Once again, we reiterate that obtaining a default is

Deeds Of Trust/Section 1717: Junior Lienholders Stepping Into Shoes Of Primary Residential Obligors Had Fee Exposure To Winning Senior Lienholders

Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Section 1717

  Nonsignatory Junior Lienholders Effectively “Stepped Into Shoes” of Primary Obligors.      Skordoulis v. Fidelity Nat’l Title Co., Case No. D065947 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 9, 2014) (unpublished) is a nice example of “be careful of what you ask for/what you lose” when an attorney fee battle happens after you as a litigant do

In The News . . . . Federal Circuit Affirms $253,777 Fee Recovery Under Patent Fee-Shifting Statute Where Plaintiff Failed To Introduce Admissible Evidence Of Infringement

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, In The News

  Highmark/Octane Recent Decisions Did Not Require Remand.      In our “In the News” post of September 8, 2014, we explored a recent Federal Circuit decision—Highmark, Inc. v. Allcare Health Mgt. System, Inc.–remanding a fee recovery for reconsideration after SCOTUS’ 2014 Highmark/Octane decisions.      However, Homeland Housewares, LLC v. Hastie2Market, LLC, No. 2013-1537 (Fed. Cir.

News . . . . E.D. Pa. Federal Judge Denies Fee Recovery To Consulting Attorney Not Obtaining Pro Hac Vice Admission And Federal Circuit Remands Patent Fee Award For Another Look In Light of Highmark/Octane.

In The News

Consulting Attorney Providing Most of the Work Needed Pro Hac Vice Admission For Purposes of Obtaining Fees Under Federal Fee-Shifting Statute.      U.S. District Judge Eduardo Robreno, in Gsell v. Rubin and Yates, Case No. 13-05723 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 4, 2014), denied attorney’s fees to a “consulting” attorney doing most of the work in an

In The News . . . . Mass. Appellate Court Says In-House Counsel Can Be Compensated Under Fee-Shifting Statute And Eighth Circuit Examines Fee Recovery Issues In Genetically-Modified Rice Farmer MDL Case

In The News

       We thank our friends at NALFA for bringing two cases of interest, although outside of California, to our attention. Massachusetts Compensated Plaintiff’s In-House Counsel in Unfair Business Practices Case.      In Holland v. Jachmann, 85 Mass.App.Ct. 292, 2014 WL 1887534 (May 14, 2014), a Massachusetts appellate court decided that a corporate plaintiff’s in-house

In The News . . . . Attorney Reprimanded For Billing Client For Discovery Sanctions Re: Attorney Conduct And Another Attorney Told He Has To Wear Socks In Court

In The News

  Iowa Reprimands Illinois Attorney on Discovery Sanctions Pass-Through Attempt.      Based on a recent ABA Journal on-line post, an Illinois attorney has been reprimanded in Iowa for billing a client for discovery sanctions imposed for the attorney’s own conduct. Gotta Wear Socks In Blackford County, Indiana.      The ABA Journal end-of-the-week posts also indicate

Lodestar/Private Attorney General/Reasonableness Of Fees: Non-Profit Entitled To CCP § 1021.5 Fee Recovery Against Developer Under Split Fee Settlement Arrangement Between Non-Profit And City

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

  However, Lodestar Had to Be Re-fixed on a Couple of Issues.      Plaintiff SONG, a non-profit, prevailed in an earlier appeal of a challenge to the environmental review of a project to amend Lancaster’s general plan to change the zoning designation so that a developer could construct a shopping center on a vacant lot

Deadlines/Prevailing Party/Reasonableness Of Fees: Fee Award To Defendants Affirmed Based On Waiver And Failure To Provide Reporter’s Transcript Of Fee Hearing

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Where Reasonableness of Fees Involved, RT Is a Likely Necessity; Cost Memo Was Timely Filed.      Pladott v. Blankstein, Case No. B250097 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 4, 2014) (unpublished) involved a plaintiff “hit” with attorney’s fees and costs by defense, with plaintiff arguing that the existence of a cross-complaint meant the postjudgment orders

Scroll to Top