Author name: Marc Alexander

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Fee Claimant Under Contractual Deed Of Trust Clauses Still Must Show It Is A Prevailing Party Under Civil Code Section 1717

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  “Losing Party” Not Entitled to Fee Under Most Contractual Fee Clauses, Muses Appellate Court.      The fee claimant in Vail Lake Rancho California, LLC v. Abreu, Case No. D061892 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 7, 2014) (unpublished) somewhat flummoxed the appellate court on review in challenging a denial of fee recovery under two contractual […]

Private Attorney General Statute: Representative Plaintiff Saving $1.278 Million For Collective Members Had Enough Financial Skin In The Game To Justify Denial of Private Attorney General Fees

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Amusement park rides, Santa Cruz.  2012.  Carol M. Highsmith, photographer.  Library of Congress. $164,812.37 Fee Request Denied.        In Calif. Portable Ride Operators, LLC v. Cal. Div. of Occupational Safety, Case No. B242219 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 6, 2014) (unpublished), a representative plaintiff for a group of portable amusement ride (carnival) members

Appealability/Homeowner Associations/POOF!: Merits Reversal Also Meant Fee Award Went POOF! Even Though No Appeal From Fee Order Was Achieved

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: POOF!

  Important Nuance to Keep in Mind—Trial Court Directed to Vacate Fee Award.      Bel Air Glen Homeowners Assn., Inc. v. Dowlatshahi, Case No. B243549 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 5, 2014) (unpublished) has a Monty Pythonesque quality about it.      What happened was that an HOA Board of Directors got its directors’ collective hackles

Sanctions: Fourth District, Division 1 Follows Galleria – CCP § 128.7 Safe Harbor Provision Not Satisfied Unless Unfiled Motion Has Definitive Hearing Date

Cases: Sanctions

  Although Unpublished, Does Tell Lower Courts You Have To Calendar and Reserve a Date Even If the Motion Is Unfiled And Potentially Never Heard.      This next case, although unpublished, is very interesting, and it will see how it pans out for practitioners and superior courts as far as calendaring/scheduling/reserving dates for motions, given

Cases Under Review: U.S. Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Dual Patent Fee-Shifting Statute Cases

Cases: Cases Under Review

  Octane Fitness and Highmark Deal With Substantive/Review Standard Issues Regarding “Exceptional” Circumstances Allowing Fee Recovery In Certain Patent Cases.      As we mentioned in our previous October 15, 2013 post, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider substantive and standard of review issues relating to the “exceptional” language in a patent statute allowing

Sanctions: Court’s Sua Sponte Sanctions Order Reversed Because No Description Of Offending Conduct And Sanctions Cannot Be Awarded To Other Party

Cases: Sanctions

  These Types of Sanctions Had To Go To Court.      A lower court, on its own OSC, imposed sanctions against one of plaintiff’s attorneys and in favor of defendant under Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7(b), (d)(2), but this was reversed by the appellate court in Meusner v. Allstate Ins. Co., Case No. A136243

In The News . . . Plaintiff Appealing Trademark Appeal Board Ruling Has To Pay USPTO’s Fees/Expenses And District Judge In ERISA Class Action Settlement Sets Fees By Looking At Comparable Past Fee Awards

In The News

  USPTO Can Recoup Fees in Trademark Appeal Board Review by District Court No Matter If Plaintiff “Wins, Loses or Draws.”      In Shammas v. Focarino, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III (E.D. Va.)—on first impression issue—held that an “odd” federal statute required plaintiff to pay all of the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office’s expenses,

Arbitration: Former Co-Counsel And Former Clients Law Waived Any Right To Arbitrate Against Former Co-Counsel Protesting Over Post-Settlement Fee Split

Cases: Arbitration

  Tons of Litigation Before Moving to Arbitrate Constituted a Clear Waiver.      Justice Bedsworth, on behalf of a 3-0 panel in Eagan Avenatti, LLP, et al. v. Stroll, et al., Case No. G048143 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 28, 2014) (unpublished), sustained a lower court ruling that former co-counsel and former clients had waived

Scroll to Top